# The Hi-Fi + Hi-Res Audiophiles' Bluetooth Headphone Adapter Thread - [17.Oct.21] iFi GO Blu impression added



## ClieOS (Oct 17, 2022)

I has always been interested in wireless headphone audio, more specifically BT adapter for headphone. Recently we have seen major advancement on BT codec as we moved from SBC/AAC to aptX (plus aptX LL and HD), then Sony's LDAC, Huawei backed SaviAudio's HWA (LHDC), and Hiby's UAT. This means BT transmission is moving from lossy Red Book CD 16bit / 48kHz compression to almost lossless 24bit / 96kHz (and soon perhaps 24bit / 192kHz) Hi-Res standard. We also see more BT5.0 implementation with newer BT chipsets, pairing with independent DAC / codec chip for improved SQ. Given the trend, I think it is about time for a general discussion thread dedicated to these small but high quality BT adapters. To set the ground rule and scope of discussion, we will keep it to BT adapters that are:

(1) Relatively small, near or smaller than a Zippo lighter or at least designed to be able to put into a shirt's front pocket / clip to collar /  hang onto the neck, etc without too much effort..
(2) Supports at least one Hi-Res / HD codec, meaning at minimum of 24bit, i.e. aptx-HD, LDAC, LHDC or UAT.
(3) Support on-board mic / voice input so it can take phone call.
(4) Above average, if not really good SQ.

[*Important*] A note to all Apple user - your devices only support AAC and SBC. So all the above hi-res codec shouldn't be a prime concern to you but AAC support is a must.


So far the short list is (*in no particular order):


*Radsone EarStudio ES100 | *3.5mm SE + 2.5mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + Dual AKM AK4375a | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, aptX-HD, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $99
*FiiO BTR3 | *3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + AKM AK4376a | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, LHDC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT4.2 | Type-C | MSRP: $70 (Discontinued)
*Astell&Kern AK XB10 | *3.5mm SE + 2.5mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + Cirrus Logic CS4350 | aptX-HD, aptX, AAC, SBC | microUSB | MSRP: $180 ($85)
*Auris Amplify* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + AKM AK4377 | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | Type-C | MSRP: $89
*TempoTec Blue* | 3.5mm SE | Savitech SA9910 + Cirrus Logic WM8904 | LHDC, SBC | microUSB | MSRP: $42
*Bluewave Audio GET* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 | aptX-HD, aptX, AAC, MP3, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | microUSB | MSRP: $130 ($99)
*Audio Technica AT-PHA55BT* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm + ESS ES9118 | LDAC, aptX, AAC, SBC | BT4.2 | microUSB | MSRP: $130 ($140)
*Ampio M1 VS-1880* | 3.5mm SE  | Qualcomm | LDAC, aptX-HD, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | microUSB | MSRP: $190 (n/a)
*Ampio P1 VS-1480* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm | LDAC, aptX-HD, AAC, aptX, SBC | Qualcomm | USB DAC | BT5.0 | microUSB | MSRP: $140 (n/a)
*ArtExtreme R3* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 | aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $87
*F. Audio BT03* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + TI PCM5102A | aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | Type-C | MSRP: $42
*Levn BTI-031* | 3.5mm SE + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 | aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Tx + Rx | microUSB | MSRP: $28
*NF HiFi NFA-L1* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + ES9038Q2M | aptX-HD, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | MSRP: $145
*Hiby W5* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + ESS ES9218P | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | UAT, LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $109
*Shanling UP2* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + ESS ES9218P | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, LHDC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $79
*ArtExtreme R7 *| 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 | aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | MSRP: $115
*FiiO M5 *| 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + AKM4377 | firmware upgradable | LDAC, LHDC, aptX-HD, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | Tx + Rx | Type-C | MSRP: $110
*Hagibis X3* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 | aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Tx + Rx | multi-points | microUSB | MSRP: $30
*Hiby W3* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + AKM AK4377 | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | UAT, LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $43 ($59)
*Oriolus 1795* | 4.4mm Bal + 3.5mm SE or 2.5mm Bal + 3.5mm Bal + 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + TI PCM1795 | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Wireless Charging | USB DAC | Type-C | MSRP: $235
*FiiO BTR5* | 3.5mm SE + 2.5mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + dual ESS ES9218P | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | Inline mic+remote supported | USB DAC | Type-C | MSRP: $140
*Shanling UP4* | 3.5mm SE + 2.5mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + dual ESS ES9218P | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, LHDC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $99
*Whooshi *| | 3.5mm SE l | Qualcomm CSR8675 + Cirrus Logic CS43131 | firmware upgradable | aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $65
*FiiO BTR3K | *3.5mm SE+ 2.5mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + dual AKM AK4377A | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $70
*Qudelix-5K* | 3.5mm SE + 2.5mm Bal | Qualcomm QCC5124 + dual ESS ES9218P | app enhanced |  firmware upgradable | LDAC, aptX Adaptive, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | Inline mic+remote supported | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $109
*TUNAI Square LDAC* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm + Cirrus Logic | LDAC, AAC, SBC  | BT5.0 | microUSB | MSRP: $33
*YLM B2* | 3.5mm SE + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + AKM AK4497EQ | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $272
*Xduoo XP-2 Pro*  | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + AKM AK4452 | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $143
*1MORE DH3001B* | 3.5mm SE | LDAC, AAC, SBC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $30
*Hiby W3S (Saber)* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm QCC5121+ AKM AK4377 | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | UAT, LDAC, aptX-HD, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $45
*Hidizs H2* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 | firmware upgradable | UAT, LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $62
*Shanling UP5* | 3.5mm SE + 2.5mm Bal + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm QCC5120 + dual ESS9219C | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, LHDC, aptX-Adaptive, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $179
*Audirect Beam 3 Plus* | 3.5mm SE + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm + ESS9281C | LDAC, aptX-HD, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $1_85_
*FiiO BTR5 2021* | 3.5mm SE + 2.5mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + dual ESS ES9219C | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | Inline mic+remote supported | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $140
*iFi Audio GO Blu *| 3.5mm SE + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm QCC51xx + Cirrus Logic CS43131 | firmware upgradable |  LDAC, LHDC, aptX-Adaptive, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.1 | Type-C | MSRP: $199
*UGREEN CM402* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm QCC3040 + DAC | aptX-HD, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $32
*Oriolus 1795S* | 2.5mm Bal + 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + dual Cirrus Logic CS43131 | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | Wireless Charging | USB DAC | Type-C | MSRP: $110
*Xduoo Poke II* | 3.5mm SE + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm CSR8675 + dual  Cirrus Logic CS43198 | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | MQA | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $360
*Khadas Tea*_ (ETA: Late May 2022)_ | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm QCC5125 + ESS ES9281AC Pro | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | MQA | BT5.2 | Type-C | MSRP: $200
*FiiO BTR7* | 3.5mm SE + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm QCC5124 + dual ESS ES9219C | app enhanced | firmware upgradable | LDAC, aptx Adaptive, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | USB DAC | BT5.1 | Type-C | MSRP: $200
*iKKO Heimdallr ITB03* | 3.5mm SE + 4.4mm Bal | Qualcomm QCC5125 + dual AKM AK4377 | LDAC, aptX-HD, aptX-LL, AAC, aptX, SBC | Optical Output | USB DAC | BT5.0 | Type-C | MSRP: $140

*Tx + Rx = can work as both transmitter and receiver.
*SE = Single-Ended Output
*Bal = Balanced Output
*($) = Street Price
*(n/a) = Not Available / Hard To Find

Any other you guy think should also make the list?


----

*Extra Note*
For those of you who use BT headphone adapter, here is one accessory that I strongly recommend - it is called ReadeREST on Amazon but you can find similar products on Aliexpress if you search "magnetic glasses holder". Instead of clipping your BT adapter on an uncomfortable / awkward position on your shirt, this allows you to place your BT adapter with far less restriction.






Please note that the above ReadeREST or similar glass holder will not work on Qudelix 5K due to 5K's extra wide shirt clip. I'll instead recommend 'magnetic name tag holder' for 5K user, like the one in picture below. The metal plate will be glued to the 5K itself while the magnetic holder go under your shirt. Also note that these kind of holder comes in various length and it is recommended to find one that is short enough for 5K.


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 19, 2022)

From upper left: Shanling UP5. UP4, UP2, Hiby W5, W3, W3 Saber, TempoTec Blue
From lower left: EarStudio ES100, Qudelix 5K, iFi GO Blu FiiO BTR3K, BTR3, BTR5

*[Impression] *
For purpose of transparency: No devices below is free review sample, and yes, I do have a habit on overspending on gears.
UPDATE: July 6th, 2021.

[ Rating: Highly Recommended > Recommended > Maybe > Cautious > Not Recommended ]

*Radsone ES100: Highly Recommended*
(+) Clean and transparent sound
(+) Single-ended and balanced output
(+) Great app support with many extra features
(-) Buttons can be hard to press at time
(-) Only average BT transmission speed./ range / stability
(-) Mostly plastic construction

*FiiO BTR3: Maybe*
(+) Full range of BT codec support
(+) App support
(+) Solid build quality
(-) Only decent driving power
(-) Warmish, slightly congested sound

*Hiby W5: Maybe*
(+) Special UAT codec support for 24/192 transmission
(+) Lots of power, great dynamic
(+) Futuristic design
(+) Charging pod for extended playtime
(+) Great BT transmission speed / range / stability
(+) App supported with OTA firmware update, but could use more polish
(-) UAT isn't stable enough to be useful and only good for Hiby music app (or Hiby DAP)
(-) Relatively short standalone playtime
(-) Full touch control is finicky / hard to use / no physical lock button to pervert accidental pressing
(-) Plastic shirt clip seems flimsy and not practical
(-) No volume control on the adapter itself
(-) Silicone sleeve for the charging pod doesn't fit very tightly.

*Shanling UP2: Recommended*
(+) Full range of BT codec support
(+) Slightly warmish sound with good dynamic
(+) Good power output
(+) Solid build quality
(+) app support, but slightly buggy
(-) Shirt clip / jacket is solid but not the most practical
(-) Easily scratch-able front and back plates

*Tempotec Blue: Not Recommended*
(+) Good neutral sound
(+) Lots of output power
(+) Good battery life
(+) Single-ended and balanced output
(-) Large body and heavy in weight
(-) No shirt clip or lanyard attachment (pocket only)
(-) Only support LHDC (HWA) and SBC
(-) LHDC is not the most stable of codec
(-) Loud powering up / down sound

*FiiO BTR5: Highly Recommended*
(+) Almost full range of BT codec support
(+) Good app support with lots of setting.
(+) Single-ended and balanced output
(+) Good build quality
(+) Excellent sound on balanced output with good power
(+) Good design on removable shirt clip
(+) OLED screen allows for most setting change without app
(-) Heavy and big for an BT adapter
(-) Single-ended output is slightly bland sounding
(-) EQ not working on LDAC yet
(-) Pricey, at least for some region of the world

*Shanling UP4: Recommended*
(+) Full range of BT codec support
(+) Single-ended and balanced output
(+) Good power output
(+) Solid build quality, decent weight despite the size
(+) Dedicated button for gain and filter setting
(+) app support, but slightly buggy
(-) Shirt clip / jacket is solid but not the most practical
(-) Easily scratch-able front and back plates
(-) Grainy sound with noticeable distortion and poor RMAA measurement

*Hiby W3: Highly Recommended*
(+) Almost full range of BT codec support
(+) App support with OTA firmware update
(+) Good build quality with sensible (*normal) design
(+) Good sound with decent output, neutral with a slight tilt toward warmth.
(+) Excellent value / price
(-) UAT isn't stable enough to be useful and only good for Hiby music app (or Hiby DAP)
(-) Volume rocker's steps are too wide apart and have to be manually fine-tuned.

*FiiO BTR3K:* *Highly Recommended*
(+) Almost full range of BT codec support
(+) Good app support with decent amount of setting.
(+) Single-ended and balanced output, and both are really good sounding
(+) Good build quality, not much bigger (shirt clip included) than the original BTR3
(+) Same good design on removable shirt clip as BTR5
(+) Same price as BTR3
(-) EQ not working on LDAC yet

*Qudelix 5K: Highly Recommended*
(+) Almost full range of BT codec support, first to include aptX Adaptive
(+) Good app support, lots of settings and capable of wireless firmware update
(+) Single-ended and balanced output, and both are really good sounding
(+) Good compacted industrial design
(+) Good EQ that works over LDAC and USB DAC
(-) App's UI could use a bit more refinement
(-) Opposite buttons can be mis-pressed, sometime sticky too
(-) Shirt clip is shallow and not the most practical to use.

*Hiby W3 Saber: Highly Recommended*
(+) Updated version the original W3 with better SoC, and better volume control steps, retains the same SQ
(+) Almost full range of BT codec support
(+) App support with OTA firmware update
(+) Good build quality with sensible (*normal) design
(+) Good sound with decent output, neutral with a slight tilt toward warmth.
(+) Excellent value / price
(-) UAT isn't stable enough to be useful and only good for Hiby music app (or Hiby DAP)

*Shanling UP5: Highly Recommended*
(+) Full range of BT codec support
(+) Single-ended and balanced output, with both 4.4mm and 2.5mm socket
(+) Excellent SQ for both SE and Bal output with good power
(+) Good build quality,
(+) OLED screen allows for most setting change without app
(+) app support with good selection of options
(+) EQ works over LDAC
(+) Pleather case included, though more of a waist / belt clip-on
(-) Very large size
(-) Slightly buggy firmware and USB-DAC function
(-) Pricy?

*NEW! iFi GO Blu: Recommended*
(+) Full range of BT codec support
(+) Single-ended and balanced output
(+) Excellent SQ for both SE and Bal output with a lot of power
(+) Exceptional build quality and design
(+) Well implemented EQ
(+) Tiny
(-) No case / shirt-clip (_? See update below_)
(-) Weak BT range (_? See update below_)
(-) No app (for enchantment / finetuning)
(-) Outer matte coating can be an issue in time
(-) No separated volume control from the source device
(-) Pricy


*Sum-up*
Out of all, *W5* probably has the best SQ for the 3.5mm single-ended output with just a faint touch of warmth and overall very good dynamic, no doubt thanks to its extra output power - but it also caused it to have the shortest playtime, which is why the need of an charging pod. As good as it sounds, W5 is hard to recommend due to its many shortcomings - while these are mostly just small flaws, they do add up to what I think is a fairly clumsy design. Most people who use BT adapter are those are willing to compromise SQ for a bit more convenience. But in the case of W5, you are compromising more for SQ than convenience. The full touch control is especially a pain to use - sometime it is hard to press correctly, other time it is too easy to mis-press -  'lacking polish' is what comes to my mind after a few days of use. UAT is too unstable to be of any usefulness and limited to HIby's own music app or DAP (thankfully LDAC is great on W5) and the app still need some work. Hiby might have aimed too high with the W5 futuristic design. It could well be a great BT adapter if it just goes for a more conventional design.

*ES100* has been well established so I am not going to spend much time talking about it - it has a good clean sound and power output, but what sets it apart is the excellent app and a full range of extra features that you can control. ES100 is what sets the standard of how any future higher-end BT adapter should measure up to.  On the other hand, *UP2* is a really good alternative for those who wants something that is just a touch more warm and musical sounding than the slightly sterile sounding ES100. The multi-functional scroll wheel is not difficult to use as well. If Shanling can invest more time to make an independent app for UP2, it would be perfect (*it is said to be in development). *[UPDATE] *Shanling app has arrived, but so far it is somewhat buggy and doesn't really do much extra stuff.

*BTR3* in itself is a solid BT adapter and FiiO has been doing a good job adding more features to its app, though unfortunately it is built into the FiiO Music app and not an independent app of its own (**UPDATE April 2020*: an independent app has been released and can be found on Play Store) . By all means a good sounding BT adapter when compared to all the other regular BT adapter out there, it does however fall slightly short when compared to the likeness of ES100 / W5 / UP2 as BTR3 sounds more congested in comparison.

Tempotec is a Chinese company that makes mostly DAC and amp, and as such perhaps it is why *Blue* really designed more like a portable DAC/amp rather than an BT adapter. It is heavy and a bit on the larger size with a fairly limited codec support, but it does offer fairly good SQ with lots of driving power - assuming if you can get a stable LHDC connection in the first place. The powering up and down sound is also overly loud and annoying. All and all, Blue is rough on the edge and not recommended.

*BTR5* on first glance is way too big and heavy for an BT adapter, but a sensible design and a removable shirt clip makes it far more usable than Tempotec Blue though it is probably pushing the limit of what is considered portable among many BT adapter users. However, the extra size and weight is offset by the features and SQ it offers - and for those who don't mind a few more grams, the BTR5 does deliver the goods. The addition of the OLED screen allows for many settings to be changed without the need of app, also the standalone app (which is still in beta) also makes BTR5 more of a completed package. The SQ and output power on the balanced 2.5mm socket is also excellent with a slightly warmish presentation that isn't that far of FiiO preferred house sound, better than that of ES100's balanced output and probably the best sound in all the BT adapters reviewed so far, besting even W5 overall. The single-ended 3.5mm is however a little bland sounding - not bad per se and definitely better than BTR3, there is however nothing truly remarkable to speak of. For those who only intended to use the 3.5mm output for music listening, BTR5 might not be the best choice value wise. However, the 3.5mm socket does offer support for inline mic+remote on headset, and that could be very useful - not to mention it also support dual mic cVc noise cancelling (when used with headset), which is something only available on smartphone until now. For the desktop user, BTR5 also offers 32bits / 384kHz support as well as DSD256 decoding on hardware level, something that you won't find any other BT adapter's USB DAC mode. So far, besides the weight/size and not having a great 3.5mm output, the only two downsides are perhaps (1) the lack of EQ on LDAC codec as well as the missing HWA (LHDC) support - the former is said to be in development while the later is actually not a bad thing, since HWA is really unstable and not particularly usable in the first place. (2) BTR5 is pricey, but the good news is that you can find it on cheaper price on some places. Last but not least - while the EQ isn't fully working (*LDAC), the clock and filter setting do make quite a noticeable impact on fine tuning the sound, even more so than what can be found on ES100. The standalone app is definitely the right way to go as well. Overall, BTR5 is an easy recommendation for those who wants the best SQ on-the-go, at least for now.

*UP4* is probably Shanling answer to BTR5. Despite having less hardware features, Shanling has done a good job on simplifying the design while keeping all the essential, resulting in a BT adapter that doesn't feel bulky yet is actually not very small. First thing to note is that it has noticeably more driving power than UP2, even on 3.5mm single-ended output. However, unlike the slightly warmish and smooth sounding UP2, UP4 has a colder sound with a noticeable grainy treble



Spoiler: Old Firmware 1.0 Impression



With the original firmware 1.0, UP4 has an uneasy presentation - after almost 2 weeks of listening, it comes clear to me that something is off with UP4 balanced output (with a smaller degree on its single-ended output as well). To make sure this is not purely an imagination / subjective interpretation, I ended up custom built a cable so I can test the UP4 balanced output on my Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 using RMAA - and the result confirms my suspicion that there is indeed significant distortion and abnormalities in UP4. First round of RMAA tests show jagged FR curve with significant treble roll-off (-3dB at 10~11kHz) regardless of digital filter setting. Secondly, distortion is almost over the roof. The result is so poor that I have to run several other USB DAC on the same test to make sure my test equipment isn't broken, yet multiple tests all point to UP4 being the culprit. To ensure my UP4 isn't a lemon, I consulted a third party whom also measured his UP4 and the result is similar to mine..Further testing, including UP4 as in both USB DAC mode as well as BT mode, reveals perhaps UP4 is not as bad as previous first round of RMAA tests suggested, but there is certainly some level of distortion as well as inconsistent issue in performance (which might explain why it was tested so badly before). At this point I can't be 100% sure if this is a hardware or software issue - if it is the later, then perhaps a firmware update will be able to correct the problem. However, without knowing if or when this problem can be fixed or not, I will caution those who want to pick up an UP4 at this moment.

For those who are interested in looking into UP4 updated RMAA's result, you can find it in the following zip file (BTR5 result is included for reference): RMAA result2.zip (fimrware 1.0)



With the new firmware 1.1, most of UP4 issues on firmware 1.0 have been fixed. New RMAA tests show that UP4, while still not picture perfect, is at least decent in most parameters. While the grainy treble has been reduced, the overall sound signature remains mostly the same. It is still a colder sound with an emphasis on detail, with a reduced but still presented graininess over treble. Not quite as cold as before, but still a leaner sound for sure. Overall imaging and positioning has also improved, now with a well presented soundstage. The improvement in the new firmware 1.1 has allowed UP4 to earn my recommendation, though I don't think it is quite there to compete with best of the best yet.  *[UPDATE] *Shanling app has arrived, but so far it is somewhat buggy and doesn't really do much extra stuff.

RMAA result3.zip (firmware 1.1)

*W3 *comes after W5 and is meant to be its little sibling, but by all means I think it is what W5 should have been. The problem with W5 is its unnecessarily complex, futuristic but also completely unpractical design. W3 on the other hand is conventional in a very good way - because everything just works. To say Hiby has learned from its mistake on the W5 will be an understatement. Another interesting point is that W3 uses the AK4377 chips instead of the newer AK4377A - the later is more optimized for mobile use, but also lesser in performance. Besides the fact that UAT is less than useful, the only real downside I'll say about the W3 is that the volume control on the W3 itself actually control the software volume on your smartphone, and each step can be overally big, resulting in one step being not loud enough yet the next step becomes overly loud. This can somewhat be remedied in the app by adjusting (limiting) the max volume on the smartphone, though I rather see an independent hardware volume control on the W3. As far as sound signature goes, W3 has a fairly neutral sound, if not ever slightly tilting toward a fainted sense of warmth, pleasing and unobtrusive - not quite as full bodied as UP2, but pretty much the same level of performance and thus also make for a good recommendation. However, it is the low price of W3 that really sets it apart as far as overall value goes. If you are on a tight budget while looking for the best bang for bucks, W3 should be on the very top of your list.

*BTR3K* comes as a slightly surprised replacement / upgraded model for BTR3. The original BTR3 is one of the very first 'Hires' Bluetooth adapter in the market that targeted audiophiles that lost their 3.5mm socket on their new smartphone. It had done a lot of things right but it was always over-shadowed by its main competition, the ES100. FiiO no doubt has taken note of the situation and designed the BTR3K to take on the challenge. First thing to note is that the BTR3K measured very well in RMAA (which FiiO gears usually do). With DAC set to High Performance mode, the result is excellent on both single-ended as well as balanced output. Output impedance are also very low on both, in the perfect sub-1-ohm range. Max power output on the balanced 2.5mm is comparable to, if not just slightly higher than ES100 2.5mm (1x voltage). Max power on 3.5mm is about half of 2.5mm, but it should be more than loud enough for your average headphone. Both BTR3K and ES100 use (*different) AKM DAC/amp codec chips in dual configuration, so overall sound signature is fairly similar. On 2.5mm output, the difference is subtle and hard to say which is better. On the 3.5mm however, BTR3K offers better sound with bigger image / soundstage and grander presentation. In short, ES100 will be able to go louder - but for the same volume, BTR3K sounds at least as good (on 2.5mm) if not better (on 3.5mm). The only real advantage that ES100 still hold are on the more sophisticated app and a working EQ on LDAC. If neither of those are important to you, BTR3K will be a better buy, consider that FiiO's app, while not as good as E100, is still head and shoulders above the rest. Given it is only about $10 more expensive than the already-excellent-in-value Hiby W3, the BTR3K now probably represents the best value and best sounding BT adapter in the sub-$100 price range.

The long anticipated *Qudelix 5K* has finally reached the market after the long Covid-19 delay, the good news is that it s well worth the wait. Both 5K's balanced and single-ended outputs measured fairly well in RMAA (*high performance mode, low output voltage), almost as good as BTR5 which uses the similar DAC configuration (dual ES9218P setup for balanced and the single ES9218P for single-ended). Output impedance for both outputs are also at a very respectable sub-1-ohm range. Output power is higher than BTR5 for the same load and it can go a little louder if wanted as well, though there is unlikely you will need to be that loud for either BT adapter for most headphones in the market (*if you do, I suspect a full sized portable DAC/amp with BT function is probably a more suitable option). 5K also comes with the newer aptX Adapive codec, though it is not nearly as widely supported as your normal flavor aptX/aptX-HD or LDAC. Besides, it is a codec that isn't meant to give the best possible SQ but rather to achieve better connection stability. Subjectively speaking, 5K is very good sounding - pretty much the same level as BTR5 and BTR3K, just a hair better than ES100 and pretty much one of the best sounding BT adapter in this impression so far. With the same DAC configuration as BTR5, the overall sound signature is about the same - neutral with a slight tilt to warmness, but 5K's 3.5mm does sound slightly less dull than that of BTR5 even though the difference isn't night and day. The 2.5mm output on the other hand is equally as good as that of BTR5. That being said, if you already own a BTR5 or BTR3K, 5K won't likely going to be an upgrade as far as SQ is concerned. The part you will likely going to find as an improvement is 5K's app, and namely its EQ system that works over LDAC as well as USB DAC (*via smartphone app control). However, the app is still in its early days so there could be more functions and settings coming in the future. Certainly the use of the newer and more powerful Qualcomm QCC5124 SoC is going to give 5K a more effortless performance over the older generation of BT adapter that rely on CSR8675. While the SQ is good, there are other minor imperfection to be found on 5K - First, the shirt clip is noticeably more shallow (in both angle of opening as well as insertion depth) and not the easiest to press. The clever design on the placement of 2.5mm and 3.5mm sockets with the incorporation of the shirt clip unavoidable makes the shirt clip less useful and practical than it should. Secondly, the opposite placement of the rocker buttons are prone to mispress, which is an old problem that we have seen on ES100. The less-than-defined rocker action is not helping either, as it is hard to really differentiate one side of the rocker from the other and always feel like both buttons will get pressed at the same time. Both of these issues, while minor, are result of form-over-function where it should have been form-follows-function. All and all, 5K is still an easy recommendation for its excellent SQ and small form factor. However, if you are don't use EQ much and already own a BTR5 or BTR3K (*especially if you don't find BTR3K lacking power), than there is no real need to get a 5K. But if you are using any other Hi-Res BT adapters and think about upgrade, then 5K should be on top of your consideration.

*Hiby W3 Saber* (= W3S) is basically the original W3 with an upgrade Bluetooth SoC. Basic function and SQ remain the same, with volume control steps being improved (*no long overly large jump of volume between steps). Price remains almost the same and thus it is just as good a value as the original W3 and thus I have no problem recommending it. If there is any downside to speak of, it is the fact that Hiby has chosen to use such a powerful SoC (QCC5121) on the W3s yet doesn't seem to want to implement more functionality (which we know QCC51xx is capable of) as the firmware has never been updated since it was released quite sometime ago. That's a shame.

To be frank, I was a bit disappointed by the Shanling UP4 - it was meant to be Shanling's answer to BTR5, yet it falls short of its promise in many ways. The *UP5 *however, is a true unpolished gem. Unlike UP4, UP5's measured good (*comparably to BTR5 and 5k in RMAA) and sounds great - in both single-ended as well as balanced output. Output impedance are calculated to be 0.8ohm for all output Subjectively speaking, particularly on balanced output, BTR5 has the best texture (*especially over mid-range), 5K has good balance on all aspects while UP5 excels in soundstage / imaging / position and dynamics. Technically however, I think they are about on par with each other. The one area where UP5 is slightly ahead of BTR5 and 5K is on the single-ended 3.5mm output - it is not quite as good as UP5's balanced output, but really not far off either. In fact, with firmware version 1.5.6., the 3.5mm output sounds (and measured) just as good in single DAC mode as it is in dual DAC mode (*which kinda begs the question of why there are two modes to begin with). The 4.4mm and 2.5mm balanced output also sound (and measured) the same, which isn't that surprising as I had suspected they are internally linked together, The question is, do we really need to have two identical sounding balanced socket? Seems to be a waste of space IMO - one socket plus an adapter could have been just as good a solution, especially since UP5 is not exactly small. Since we are talking about size - it is obvious UP5 is on the larger size of things, making it almost impossible as a clip-on on chest area, nor exactly the most sensible for front pocket when convenience is a must. Like BTR5, the addition of an OLED screen is a good thing, allowing most setting to be changed without the need of an app - that being said, the screen should have automatically wake up during volume change (which it doesn't and you need to press the volume wheel down to manually wake it up). Last but not least, the initial firmware on the UP5 is very unstable, both on basic functionality as well as sound quality. The new firmware (v1.5.6) has mostly address the problem, though still not completely stable. Sometime it wasn't recognized when plugged into a PC, sometime the sound will cut out when used as BT receiver and remains so even after multiple restart, then somehow it will come back all by itself. While these bugs are mostly random and do not occur very frequently, it is nonetheless a sign that UP5's firmware is useable but not quite ready for primetime yet. More work is definitely needed before UP5 can truly shine (*not to mention that the advertised MQA function on USB DAC mode is yet to be implemented, though not a big concern of mine as I don't subscribe much into MQA, or its related service). So does UP5 worth the fairly big jump in price over BTR5 / 5K? Well, not quite just yet, at least not with the current firmware. Like I said before, UP5 is an unpolished gem, and it will need a polished firmware to complete the package. Even with a stable firmware, the large size also makes UP5 less appealing when portability / convenience is a priority. For now, I'll only recommend it with reservation. *[UPDATE]* UP5 has became much more stable with firmware v1.6.0 and MQA is now functional. All and all a good improvement over older firmware but still required more work. It is however enough to be highly recommended.

*NEW!* Even since the beginning of the brand, iFi has been known for their value based approach toward product design that doesn't compromise style or performance. It is kinda a surprise that they will want to release a BT adapter such as the *GO Blu* as it doesn't quite fit into their usual targeted audience, especially since there are already quite some strong competitions in the same market that offer cheaper option. Basic RMAA measurement shows no obvious issue with GO Blu. It isn't nearly as stellar as BTR5 or 5K, but it isn't bad either. Overall, it seems to be about the same level as UP5, more or less. Output impedance are excellent with both single-ended and balanced output calculated to be under 0.3 ohm. Output power is also no sloth, with some of the highest output found on similar device. Subjectively speaking, GO Blu sounds very good as well. It retains the classic iFi house sound that is just a little more on the smooth and warm side of thing, but still technically proficient. Compared to BTR5, 5K or UP5, the GO Blu might seems missing the very top end of clarity and crispiness. At the same time however, it offer a thicker, more textured and euphonic midrange than the others. One of the specialty of GO Blu is its EQ - XBass and XSpace can both trace their original all the way back to the original iFi Micro series. They works quite well as a hardware implementation and doesn't affect the SQ much as compared to software based EQ , though the fact that they are not adjustable / fine-tunable means they won't always work quite as well on every headphone you pair them with. Sometime they are an good addition, but sometime they can be very minimalistic. Physically the GO Blu is very well designed and built. It is small and light in the hand yet feels like a premium product with its unique clickable copper alloy volume wheel and metal front plate. The matte coating on the plastic is a nice touch, but I have question on its longevity as I have seen every product with this kind of matte coating degrades significant with time, usually result in the coating becoming very sticky and has to be removed / cleaned off with organic solvent, which destroy the matte coating completely. I guess only time will tell how it will go but I really don't like to see any matte coating on plastic surface personally. Another big overlook for iFi is the lack of a case and shirt-clip for the GO Blu. Many BT adapter user like to attach their device to the shirt near the neck / front chest area for convenience, especially with many IEM / headphone these days having removable cable design that allow for a shorter custom cable. The lack of a real way to attach the GO Blu to the chest area really limits the functionality of GO Blu as a BT adapter, especially consider it is supposed to allow the user to pick up call more seamlessly. Another minor thing I don't like about the GO Blu is its volume control implementation - First, it has auto gain control, which I personally would rather prefer an manual switch. Second, the volume wheel controls the source's digital volume directly. I am however much in favor of how other higher end BT adapter implement a separated hardware volume control that function independently from the source's digital control, in which offers finer control at both ends. One last minor thing is the relatively weak BT range, which by far is the weakest of all the nicer BT adapters in my collection. It is still totally useable as in what normal BT device is meant to be used in very close proximity to the source, perhaps in a meter or two. But it will be the first to drop out once the distance is increased, making it not the best of choice for those who like to leave their source stationary while walks around the house with their BT adapter. All and all, GO Blu is a nice product that can compete SQ wise with other ToTL BT adapters in the market - but the high price tag, lack of app enhancement and some of the minor issues mentioned above have really limited its overall value when compared to the competition. It is recommended, though I don't think it is for everyone. *[UPDATE]* Firstly, rumor is that iFi has secretly fixed the weak BT range issue since the 2nd batch after the problem was confirmed by multiple users. Given iFi doesn't seem to wish to either confirm / deny this when asked on multiple occasion, it is in a way indirectly confirmed the rumor itself. But given no official answer is given, my rating remains as it is, especially since no remedy is offered to the first batch user. Secondly, a free case is now included with the second batch forward. Unfortunately, many first batch user were resolved to paying / getting their own case.





XBass - peak around 20Hz and go up to 200Hz. The early roll off above 16kHz is what gives GO Blu its signature smooth sound.

------------------------
*[Battery Test]*
As battery test usually take hours and hours to do, this section will only be updated occasionally and not every model will be covered.

Testing condition:
Source: FiiO M6, random selection of music on loop, LDAC SQ prioritized
Devices: No EQ, all extra setting disable and low gain (if applicable), 50mV output (or as close as possible) into a 23.5 ohm dummy load, single-ended 3.5mm output.

Result:
FiiO BTR3 - over 9 hours
EarStudio ES100 - around 12 hours
FiiO BTR5 - over 7.5 hours
Shanling UP2 - over 9 hours
Qudelix 5K - over 13 hours (High Performance, Normal Output)


------------------------
*[RSSI Test]*
Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) is done via Sony Xperia 5 and Bluetooth Signal Strength Meter app by Edgar Garcia Leyva. Please note that RSSI number change from moment to moment and so the number below are the rough average of several test on each device and not an absolute number. All device are tested at the same environment one by one. with BT adapter being stationary while smartphone being moved around. The three numbers represent the RSSI (dBm) from the two devices when they are (1) about 2 inches away, (2) about 2 meters away, in the same room and (3) about 6 meters away, with wall in between. The least negative the number for a given distance, the cleaner / stronger the signal it is. For example, when Bluetooth device A and B are placed at the same 1 meter away from the smartphone, Device A with a -60dBm RSSI will maintain a better signal than Device B with a -70dBm RSSI. This becomes importance when using a very high compression BT codec such as LDAC 990 as it means Device A will not as easy to drop out as Device B. Last note -120dBm is considered to have minimum / loss of signal.

Qudelix 5K -62 -67 -92
FiiO BTR5 -62 -75 -93
Shanling UP5 -62 -74 -95
iFi Audio Go Blu -72 -90 -106



------------------------

*[More Impression]*

Hiby W5 and followup by @pstickne
ArtExtreme R3 by @Hal Rockwell
FiiO BTR5 by @sinquito
Qriolus 1795 here and here by @greyforest


----------



## cesdag

Great thread! Do you have any info on when the btr5 will be released? I own the ak xb10, I do like the sound quality, but the Bluetooth connection is not very stable though, I get small interruptions here and there. The build quality is not that great as well. I use mostly the balanced output, so I was looking for other options with balanced output but better Bluetooth connection.


----------



## ClieOS

cesdag said:


> Great thread! Do you have any info on when the btr5 will be released? I own the ak xb10, I do like the sound quality, but the Bluetooth connection is not very stable though, I get small interruptions here and there. The build quality is not that great as well. I use mostly the balanced output, so I was looking for other options with balanced output but better Bluetooth connection.



No other info on BTR5 for now. FiiO is keeping their lips tight, but it probably won't be very far away from actual release as they usually won't start promoting unless they are almost ready to begin production. We will probably going to see the first batch being released in China first as FiiO like to do very small first batch to make sure there won't be any major manufacturing problem down the line and so quantity usually is limited to their native market.

One of the main problem with these hi-res BT codec is bandwidth, and namely interference from WiFi. Unfortunately it doesn't seem like there is an quick solution over this issue - the nosier the wireless environment, the worst any hi-res adapter will performs.


----------



## cesdag

Thanks for the info, gonna be following this thread for future updates. In the meantime, I may give a try to the es100.


----------



## abirdie4me

I use the es100 in my car, has been very solid and reliable upgrade over my previous generic Bluetooth adapter. Always on the look out for an upgrade though..


----------



## subtec (May 15, 2019)

Reminder that Bluetooth 5 has no effect on sound quality, range, or battery life for headphones or BT audio adapters. The changes in BT 5 only apply to Bluetooth Low Energy mode, which is not currently used for audio transmission.


*****

As a suggestion, it might be useful to add battery size and/or runtime to the specs.


Here's a list of some different adapters I compiled a while back:

Shanling M0 (DAP)
 80mW in 32ohm, 630mAh 15hr, AAC/aptX/LDAC

Radsone Earstudio
 40mW in 32ohm, 350mAh 14hr, aptX HD/LDAC (CSR8675)

Bluewave Get
 125mW in 32ohm, 200mAh 6hr, aptX HD (CSR8675)

Podo Labs Jack
 2Vrms in 600ohm, 300mAh 12hr, aptX (CSR8670)

Fiio Q5
 400mW in 32ohm (2.5mm bal)/150mW in 32ohm (3.5mm SE), 3800mAh 10hr, aptX (CSR8670)

Fiio BTR1
 15mW in 32ohm, 205mAh 8hr, aptX (CSR8670)

Fiio BTR3
 300mAh 11hr, AAC/aptX/aptX-LL/aptX-HD/LDAC

Artextreme/Jates R3
 450mAh 30hr, AAC/aptX/aptX-LL/aptX-HD, <200ohm



*****

Personally, I'm hoping to see some aptX Adaptive adapters in the next year. That's about the only thing that could get me to upgrade from my current ES100 (as well as better battery life).


----------



## ClieOS (May 15, 2019)

abirdie4me said:


> I use the es100 in my car, has been very solid and reliable upgrade over my previous generic Bluetooth adapter. Always on the look out for an upgrade though..



Car do act somewhat like a Faraday cage and actually help to reduce outside interference.



subtec said:


> ...



As said on the first post, it has to support minimum 24bit (aptX-HD, LDAC, LHDC, UAT) otherwise it can't be considered hi-res / HD. Also the ability to take call otherwise it is more of a Bluetooth DAC/amp and not a headphone adapter.

Standalone, battery size / life + runtime is less than useful information since it has to be interpreted with actual usage / load / output power and testing condition. Power output is troublesome as testing with THD+N @ 1% (*a common international practice) or @ 10% (*Japanese standard) will give dramatical different result. Testing with different codec also plays major role in runtime as SBC vs. LDAC is going to have very different runtime even on the same device. Unless these devices are tested all in relatively similar condition, spec like battery size/life and output power really don't make for good comparative reference, thus I do not include them in the list.


----------



## ClieOS (May 22, 2019)

Short list update: F. Audio BT03 and Levn BTI-031.


----------



## CKS0923

I have been searching for a pair of BT headphones that sounds like my NAD HP-50. I had my mind set on the HP-70s but keep reading that they can sound edgy at times, which hasn't been the case for the HP-50. Then one day I came across an article introducing a BT receiver and later found this thread. This could have been the perfect solution for my need! Converting the HP-50 to wireless! One question I have is, how does these (< $150 ones) generally sound when compared to, say headphones wired to a Sansa Clip+?


----------



## C_Lindbergh (May 24, 2019)

There is also the Audio Labs M-DAC nano, I think its the only bluetooth dac/amp with wireless charging. But overall its a too tiny battery and too expensive in my opinion. 

http://audiolab.co.uk/product-detail.php?pid=26


----------



## ClieOS

CKS0923 said:


> I have been searching for a pair of BT headphones that sounds like my NAD HP-50. I had my mind set on the HP-70s but keep reading that they can sound edgy at times, which hasn't been the case for the HP-50. Then one day I came across an article introducing a BT receiver and later found this thread. This could have been the perfect solution for my need! Converting the HP-50 to wireless! One question I have is, how does these (< $150 ones) generally sound when compared to, say headphones wired to a Sansa Clip+?



I have not listened to my Clip+ for a long time, but I'll say at least the really good BT adapter, such as FiiO BTR3 and EarStudio ES100 can compete with that level of SQ easily.



C_Lindbergh said:


> There is also the Audio Labs M-DAC nano, I think its the only bluetooth dac/amp with wireless charging. But overall its a too tiny battery and too expensive in my opinion.
> 
> http://audiolab.co.uk/product-detail.php?pid=26



Didn't see a mention of mic. By the look of it, indeed it is more of a BT amp/DAC rather than an adapter.


----------



## Costia (May 27, 2019)

Could you add price or price range to the list?

mW to 32ohm would be nice as well, since personally i am looking for an adapter for fullsized headphones with a regular 3.5 connector.


----------



## ClieOS

Costia said:


> Could you add price or price range to the list?



Sure, I'll add them later - but price does change a bit when you have big discount from Amazon / Aliexpress / Taobao alike. Some of them are also limited to a certain location of sale so shipping could also be a factor. Listing just MSRP might not be the most helpful for some of them.


----------



## ClieOS

Short list updated with MSRP and street price. 

Also we got an ETA for FiiO BTR5: July.


----------



## ClieOS

Status update: 

1) While Shanling UP2 and Hiby W5 have not been officially available yet, they can be obtained relatively easily. UP2 has already been fully released in China and W5, while still claimed to be in pre-ordered stage, can also be ordered and already being delivered by Hiby.

2) ETA for FiiO BTR5 has been pushed back to around August.


----------



## ClieOS

Adding FiiO M5 - while built as DAP, it actually seems to also fulfill all the criteria as a Hi-res BT adapter, including the ability to take call.


----------



## Ynot1

No dac though.

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/329...08-4f0d-a11a-9c5cc4fafbec&transAbTest=ae803_3


----------



## ClieOS

Ynot1 said:


> No dac though.
> 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32996995824.html?spm=2114.search0104.3.1.f79bd451lFnqwx&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_7_10065_10130_10068_10547_319_10546_317_10548_10545_10696_10084_453_454_10083_10618_10307_537_536_10059_10884_10887_321_322_10103,searchweb201603_52,ppcSwitch_0&algo_expid=0d63df40-2708-4f0d-a11a-9c5cc4fafbec-0&algo_pvid=0d63df40-2708-4f0d-a11a-9c5cc4fafbec&transAbTest=ae803_3



If it doesn't take phone call, it can't be counted as a BT headphone adapter.


----------



## ClieOS

Hiby W5 just arrived


----------



## Cevisi

ClieOS said:


> Hiby W5 just arrived


Wow i waiting for a nice review


----------



## cesdag

Very curious how the W5 compares with es100.


----------



## ClieOS

Don't have time to write long review, but I will try to start writing up short bulletin style impression on the Hi-res BT adapter I have, including ES100, BTR3, TempoTec Blue, W5 and probably UP2 (which hopefully will be here by next week).


----------



## ClieOS

Shanling UP2 is here.



 



 



 

Haven't got a chance to listen to it yet - will need to charge it up first, then do a firmware upgrade later. 

----

[Update] ArtExtreme R7 added to the list


----------



## caprimulgus (Jun 19, 2019)

Ooh, didn't see this thread! ClieOS, you have more info on BTR5 than FiiO themselves are willing to share with us (nothing!). 

(Strange that FiiO is happy to share sneak peak and info to their Chinese audience, but won't provide any comment whatsoever to us here!)

Interested to see how the UP2 compares to the BTR3, but really I am holding out for BTR5!


----------



## Punslayer

ClieOS said:


> *NF Audio NFA-L1* | 3.5mm SE | Qualcomm CSR8675 + ES9038Q2M | aptX-HD, aptX, SBC | BT5.0 | MSRP: $145



Do you have a link for information on this one?  I'm a little curious, but can't find anything.


----------



## ClieOS

Punslayer said:


> Do you have a link for information on this one?  I'm a little curious, but can't find anything.



I think I might have mislabeled it - NF Audio is actually an IEM company, this one is from another company called NF HiFi. You can find on their Taobao's store here.

It is actually a very intriguing BT adapter - well ahead of its time in design, but also quite expensive and didn't support LDAC, otherwise it would have been almost perfect.


----------



## Punslayer

I've been looking at NF Audio IEMs lately, which is what piqued my interest.  That does look interesting though, even without LDAC.


----------



## ClieOS

Update with impression. See 2nd post here.


----------



## DanWiggins

ClieOS said:


> I think I might have mislabeled it - NF Audio is actually an IEM company, this one is from another company called NF HiFi. You can find on their Taobao's store here.
> 
> It is actually a very intriguing BT adapter - well ahead of its time in design, but also quite expensive and didn't support LDAC, otherwise it would have been almost perfect.


Aha!  We found out where all those excess Pebble watch screens went!


----------



## ClieOS

Tempotec Blue impression added to 2nd post.


----------



## pstickne (Jun 26, 2019)

My W5 thoughts:

- Pleasing sounds when paired with K10U and Spiral Dot tips; ‘gentle yet full mids’; may be too laid back with some IEMs; does not go for reference. Subjectively, SQ preference: W5 > iPhone 6 SE line out >= ES100. (I am really not a fan of the ES100 mids in my setup.)

- Touch input ‘less user
friendly’ than even the awful ES100 controls. Very hard to even clip on without at least stop/pausing. Can’t really be kept in pocket as movement will trigger the touch controls. Can lock touch in (iOS) app, but not from the device itself, mostly defeating the purpose - maybe an auto-lock feature?

- Can’t control volume directly from device. Volume level steps from iPhone rather large, even with volume sensitivity setting on max.

- Clip stays on belt, when upright, even though it seems like it shouldn’t. 2 extra clips in box: these things are probably easy to lose.

- ‘20 hour battery’ only with mothership pod. Doesn’t official support playback while charging due to design. The device doesn’t “stop” such usages though and one can angle in the receiver while charging. Case mods? Impact on battery life?

- Medicore app compared to ES100. Even discounting feature differences, the ES100 app feels more ‘grown up’ and polished.

- Stuttering (very infrequent, maybe once every 4 hours) on opposite-side-of-body although has about 20ft line-of-site range (15ft with a corner wall) before appearing to lose signal. I don’t recall the ES100 ever stuttering when really close to paired device.

- “Find W5” feature in app should be more common..


----------



## pstickne (Jun 26, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> Car do act somewhat like a Faraday cage and actually help to reduce outside interference.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


AAC (from an Apple device such as an iPhone or other good-AAC coding source) is enough to be “Hi-Res”, insofar as actual “SS” goes (see accuracy vs precision, eg). It is just not in the current marketing train with big flashy numbers, and Android AAC implementations are inconsistent at best. However, AAC is a very transmission-efficient codec with high use of psychoacoustics so many ‘high numbers’ can be misleading.

Also, not really sure how one can apples-to-apples “count” 24-bit over a lossy non-PCM coding (of any kind). Could also devolve into the different LDAC profiles..

As iPhone only supports AAC (ignoring SBC), and AAC is arguably still ‘on par’ with aptX HD, I recommend AAC support is also a requirement. Again, only in support of iPhone/Apple usage; Android should use a codec that is ‘better supported’ on that stack.


----------



## ClieOS

pstickne said:


> AAC (from an Apple device such as an iPhone or other good-AAC coding source) is enough to be “Hi-Res”, insofar as actual SS goes. ...



Thanks for the W5 impression, I'll put a link to the 2nd post.

Unfortunately I think you have Cook & Co. to thank for their courage on not wanting to improve BT codec while removing headphone socket from iPhone. I can understand why they will want to avoid paying Qualcomm more royalty, but Sony is partically giving the licence of LDAC encoder away for free, not to mention it is way passed due time for an AAC update that we all know Apple is more than capable of. Given AAC is the most common BT codec (next to the mandatory SBC), I think it is easier to point out which adapter doesn't support it rather than making it a requirement, and perhaps also a warning to Apple users.


----------



## pstickne (Jun 26, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> Thanks for the W5 impression, I'll put a link to the 2nd post.
> 
> Unfortunately I think you have Cook & Co. to thank for their courage on not wanting to improve BT codec while removing headphone socket from iPhone. I can understand why they will want to avoid paying Qualcomm more royalty, but Sony is partically giving the licence of LDAC encoder away for free, not to mention it is way passed due time for an AAC update that we all know Apple is more than capable of. Given AAC is the most common BT codec (next to the mandatory SBC), I think it is easier to point out which adapter doesn't support it rather than making it a requirement, and perhaps also a warning to Apple users.



Regardless, and I do wish AAC was given more overall love (eg. improvements) and promotion, I guess that’s mostly a reminder to us iPhone folk: make sure to look for AAC support!


----------



## ClieOS (Jun 29, 2019)

For those of you who use BT headphone adapter, here is one accessory that I strongly recommend - it is called ReadeREST on Amazon but you can find similar products on Aliexpress if you search "magnetic glasses holder". Instead of clipping your BT adapter on an uncomfortable / awkward position on your shirt, this allows you to clip your BT adapter on it with far less restriction on how you position the BT adapter.


----------



## pstickne (Jun 30, 2019)

Alright, changing my feedback of the HiBy W5 to “hard pass” until the software issues are sorted. The BT software/firmware and “HiBy Blue” app needed more work before release - does it even support updates? (For comparison, my disliked ES100 doesn’t have any of the issues below.)

Broken feature:
- EQ in W5 “HiBy Blue” App settings appear to have no effect. I slide things, no audio difference.. also, worst ‘sliders’ in any iOS app I’ve used. (L/R gain bias and other features ‘work’ so the app is able to send configuration data.)

General bad software/BT implementation:
- Device ‘absolute volume’ can de-sync from host device. Seems to be restored after pause/play or lowering volume to zero: painfully loud if the sync occurs after raising volume unaware.
- “HiBy Blue” App usually not able to compete full connection: “please try again after restarting the device”. Hint: doesn’t solve the issue reliably. Try to unpair completely..
- “HiBy Blue” App (sometimes) tries to double-pair W5 even though it is already paired to the phone. It occasionally connects without attempting to double-pair.
- In iOS BT settings, W5 can show up as available device even when paired. The first pairing has to be forgotten  and the “new” device has to be connected. (I believe this is related to above “HiBy Blue” connection issues.)
- W5 settings appear not applied correctly all the time or quick enough on startup. This can result in volume changes right after connecting the device when the volume sensitivity has been set in the app.

Also, the “short + long press” (no duration given to “long press”) to turn the device off is a very frustrating experience. Mario masters might enjoy the timing nuances required: I do not.


----------



## Cevisi

Why is the fiio q5 or q5s not in this treath


----------



## ClieOS

Cevisi said:


> Why is the fiio q5 or q5s not in this treath



They are too big and don't take call, so they are not BT adapter, but BT DAC/amp.


----------



## tiamor988

I almost bought the BTR3 (since I can't found any info regarding the BTR5) until I found this thread. Will wait on the BTR5.


----------



## scook94

ClieOS said:


> Shanling UP2 is here.
> 
> 
> 
> Haven't got a chance to listen to it yet - will need to charge it up first, then do a firmware upgrade later.



As I have a UP2 incoming I'm curious about the firmware upgrade you mentioned, I haven't been able to find anything about that on their website (at least not on the English version) can you share any info/links?


----------



## ClieOS

scook94 said:


> As I have a UP2 incoming I'm curious about the firmware upgrade you mentioned, I haven't been able to find anything about that on their website (at least not on the English version) can you share any info/links?



First, download the UP2 fimrware 1.3 package here.

There should be 2 folder inside the zip file - one has an .exe file in it while the other has a .dfu file in it - you need to install the exe file into your PC first, it is the official upgrade program for all Qualcomm / CSR BT chipset. If you already updated your BTR3 before, it is basically the same thing (this particular exe is a newer version of what FiiO used, so it is probably best to update it as well). Then you need to use the installed program (DfuWizard) to upload the dfu file uptp the UP2 - to do that, you need to turn your UP2 into DFU firmware upgrade mode first by plugging it onto your PC, then press and hold the volume knob for 8 seconds until LED indicator light goes off. Once the LED is off, it is ready to update. The rest of the process is the same as FiiO's BTR3, which you can find detail instruction on FiiO's website.


----------



## scook94

ClieOS said:


> First, download the UP2 fimrware 1.3 package here.
> 
> There should be 2 folder inside the zip file - one has an .exe file in it while the other has a .dfu file in it - you need to install the exe file into your PC first, it is the official upgrade program for all Qualcomm / CSR BT chipset. If you already updated your BTR3 before, it is basically the same thing (this particular exe is a newer version of what FiiO used, so it is probably best to update it as well). Then you need to use the installed program (DfuWizard) to upload the dfu file uptp the UP2 - to do that, you need to turn your UP2 into DFU firmware upgrade mode first by plugging it onto your PC, then press and hold the volume knob for 8 seconds until LED indicator light goes off. Once the LED is off, it is ready to update. The rest of the process is the same as FiiO's BTR3, which you can find detail instruction on FiiO's website.



Great, many thanks!


----------



## dfung

@ClieOS - Would any of the BT adapters you've listed can simultaneously connect wirelessly between a phone and a BT IEM? Or a BT DAC/AMP will do that instead?
Is it possible to have an entirely wireless set up through BT between the DAC/AMP + smartphone + IEM? 

I'm really new to the game. Just bought my first IEM a couple of months ago, BGVP DM6.  
Sorry if this is very basic knowledge.  FiiO said no and Shanling just ignored me, haha.

I mostly listen to YouTube and Audible and need my phone by my side most of the time.

I'm kind of an active guy. So keeping all wireless is very important to me.


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 19, 2019)

dfung said:


> @ClieOS - Would any of the BT adapters you've listed can simultaneously connect wirelessly between a phone and a BT IEM? Or a BT DAC/AMP will do that instead?
> Is it possible to have an entirely wireless set up through BT between the DAC/AMP + smartphone + IEM?
> 
> I'm really new to the game. Just bought my first IEM a couple of months ago, BGVP DM6.
> ...



FiiO and Shanling won't have any answer for you, mostly because what you are asking make no logical sense.

An BT adapter (or in fact any BT supporting DAC/amp) takes BT signal from a source, in this case most likely a smartphone, then convert it into an analog signal to output to the headphone of your choice. An BT IEM works just the same, except that the BT circuit inside the BT IEM only meant to drive the IEM's transducer and no other headphone. So basically a BT IEM is just a IEM and an BT adapter integrated into single unit., while a standalone BT adapter can be used with (most of) any IEM.

Therefore what you are asking for, is for a smartphone to send a BT signal to an BT adapter to output analog electrical signal, then somehow magically re-encode the signal back into BT and send it to another BT adapter circuit (that built into an IEM) and so it can be turn back into analog electrical signal again to driver the IEM's transducer - (1) the first question you must ask yourself is: what is the point of turning a perfectly fine BT signal into analog signal, just so you need to turn it back to digital BT signal to send and decode back to analog signal again? Logicality speaking, it is a cleaner and more efficient process just to send the BT signal from the smartphone to the BT IEM. (2) The 2nd question is of course, even if you can somehow do what you want it to do (smarphone -> BT adapter -> BT IEM), will it improve the sound? The answer is "no". It is the BT circuit inside your BT IEM that will do the actual decoding and driving the IEM's transducer, so it is the limiting factor of the whole setup. Not only does your BT IEM won't benefit from such a setup, it will most likely degrade the SQ on the process since every time a decoding/re-encoding takes place, the original signal always suffer a little lose of quality - again, the best way is to minimize any extra step in the process so a direct connection between the smartphone and  BT IEM will provide the best possible result.

Because of the 2 reasons mentioned above, no BT chipset maker ever design a BT chipset that can receive, decode, re-encode and transmit BT signal from a smartphone to an BT headphone, as it is a waste of time and energy (not to mention the lost of quality) to do so. It will be like designing a battery for smartphone - instead of powering the smartphone by the battery itself, it will first charge a secondary battery inside the smartphone, then the 2nd battery is used to power the smartphone - it is not that you can't have such a design, just that it is gonna be a stupid and wasteful design that has no upside.

So to simplify - you should just connect your BT IEM to your smartphone. A BT adapter main purpose is to add BT ability to normal headphone, not to (nor is it possible to) improve headphone that already has BT capability.


----------



## canonlp

http://plussoundaudio.com/customcables/bluetooth.html

I wish this had ldac, been wanting something like this that has a cable built in so I don't need to clip the BT receiver on my shirt


----------



## ballog

Is this the first look of the hotly anticipated BTR5?
https://www.bilibili.com/video/av52325535/


----------



## ClieOS

canonlp said:


> I wish this had ldac, been wanting something like this that has a cable built in so I don't need to clip the BT receiver on my shirt



One has existed for quite some time: Elecom LBT-HPC1000RC


----------



## DanWiggins (Jul 19, 2019)

pstickne said:


> AAC (from an Apple device such as an iPhone or other good-AAC coding source) is enough to be “Hi-Res”, insofar as actual “SS” goes (see accuracy vs precision, eg). It is just not in the current marketing train with big flashy numbers, and Android AAC implementations are inconsistent at best. However, AAC is a very transmission-efficient codec with high use of psychoacoustics so many ‘high numbers’ can be misleading.
> 
> Also, not really sure how one can apples-to-apples “count” 24-bit over a lossy non-PCM coding (of any kind). Could also devolve into the different LDAC profiles..
> 
> As iPhone only supports AAC (ignoring SBC), and AAC is arguably still ‘on par’ with aptX HD, I recommend AAC support is also a requirement. Again, only in support of iPhone/Apple usage; Android should use a codec that is ‘better supported’ on that stack.


Not sure I'd consider AAC as hi-res.  To be hi-res, you need more bandwidth (typically 47+ kHz) than a CD, and more dynamic range than a CD (typically 20+ bits).  AAC comes woefully short - as does SBC, and AptX - on these.  AptX-HD gets close, and LDAC at 990 kbps is even closer - but both come short of technically being hi-res. 

Here's a measurement of multiple AAC implementations, including one on an iPhone 7: https://www.soundguys.com/understanding-bluetooth-codecs-15352/ - bandwidth extends to ~18 kHz at best.  Is that enough?  For most people, I would undoubtedly say yes!  But it is decidedly NOT hi-res.

Here's an interesting test of the LDAC CODEC: https://www.soundguys.com/ldac-ultimate-bluetooth-guide-20026/ - it's got the bandwidth, but comes up short in dynamic range, mainly because the noise floor grows.  it's dynamic range is a solid 16-18 bit solution, and bandwidth is about 47 kHz, so it's really close - but technically not hi-res.


----------



## pstickne (Jul 19, 2019)

dfung said:


> @ClieOS - Would any of the BT adapters you've listed can simultaneously connect wirelessly between a phone and a BT IEM?


Generally an audio source device (ie. phone or DAP) can connect to at most ONE Audio BT device at once. However, one can switch between multiple paired BT devices relatively easily through the settings. (I can switch between 3 different BT receivers in a few seconds because I have all of those paired.)

There are some BT _receivers_ that can connect to TWO sources at once (this is called "Multipoint"). However, these are restricted to SBC when connected to multiple devices and BT (Classic / Audio) is really designed for ONE<->ONE.

So, to answer the question: "no". However, the phone can switch between the BT IEM and the BT adapter (or car audio, etc.) relatively easily.


----------



## pstickne (Jul 19, 2019)

DanWiggins said:


> Not sure I'd consider AAC as hi-res.  To be hi-res, you need more bandwidth (typically 47+ kHz) than a CD, and more dynamic range than a CD (typically 20+ bits).  AAC comes woefully short - as does SBC, and AptX - on these.  AptX-HD gets close, and LDAC at 990 kbps is even closer - but both come short of technically being hi-res.
> 
> Here's a measurement of multiple AAC implementations, including one on an iPhone 7: https://www.soundguys.com/understanding-bluetooth-codecs-15352/ - bandwidth extends to ~18 kHz at best.  Is that enough?  For most people, I would undoubtedly say yes!  But it is decidedly NOT hi-res.
> 
> Here's an interesting test of the LDAC CODEC: https://www.soundguys.com/ldac-ultimate-bluetooth-guide-20026/ - it's got the bandwidth, but comes up short in dynamic range, mainly because the noise floor grows.  it's dynamic range is a solid 16-18 bit solution, and bandwidth is about 47 kHz, so it's really close - but technically not hi-res.


Alright, I can't argue that .. and I can say I can't hear past ~16kHz 

41kHz on a CD is fine (with exception of an extreme rarity, humans can't hear more than this can represent, even as a child), although I'll accept 48kHz for pretty conversions. Dynamic range and noise / artifacts and especially re-shaping (uhg, wrong term?) are more relevant when running through lossy compression.

I think, mostly I get grumpy that it's a lot of marking.. anyway, 41kHz/24 meets "Hi-Res Audio" guidelines. Not sure why people like to go off the rails on the sample rate. Here is the "Hi-Res Audio" Gold Sticker manual, for posterity. And here is an example of MISLEADING marketing that I dislike.. anyway, time for a picnic.


----------



## ClieOS

BTR5 latest update: ETA around late August / September


----------



## caprimulgus (Jul 23, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> BTR5 latest update: ETA around late August / September



Cheers for the update, mate!

I'll be in China in October, so might be a good time to grab one! (I assume stuff like this would be cheaper in China than to purchase delivered to Australia through AliExpress?)

Plus, hopefully you've got one and reviewed it by then!


----------



## dfung (Jul 24, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> FiiO and Shanling won't have any answer for you, mostly because what you are asking make no logical sense.
> 
> An BT adapter (or in fact any BT supporting DAC/amp) takes BT signal from a source, in this case most likely a smartphone, then convert it into an analog signal to output to the headphone of your choice. An BT IEM works just the same, except that the BT circuit inside the BT IEM only meant to drive the IEM's transducer and no other headphone. So basically a BT IEM is just a IEM and an BT adapter integrated into single unit., while a standalone BT adapter can be used with (most of) any IEM.
> 
> ...



This is very informative. Learned quite a bit here. Appreciate it!
So would this set up improve sound quality instead？
1. DAC/AMP plugged to phone via cable
2. BT IEM connect to DAC/AMP via BT

The assumption is the output from the DAC/AMP sends out digital signal and the BT headphones receive that same signal without going through a process of encoding and decoding.
With the DAC/AMP having a superior BT codec, then that would improve the sound?
Or is the bottleneck still with the BT set plugged to the IEM

For context, I have the MEE Audio BTX2 plugged to a pair of BGVP DM6


----------



## dfung

pstickne said:


> Generally an audio source device (ie. phone or DAP) can connect to at most ONE Audio BT device at once. However, one can switch between multiple paired BT devices relatively easily through the settings. (I can switch between 3 different BT receivers in a few seconds because I have all of those paired.)
> 
> There are some BT _receivers_ that can connect to TWO sources at once (this is called "Multipoint"). However, these are restricted to SBC when connected to multiple devices and BT (Classic / Audio) is really designed for ONE<->ONE.
> 
> So, to answer the question: "no". However, the phone can switch between the BT IEM and the BT adapter (or car audio, etc.) relatively easily.


Good to know!  Right now leaning on a good DAC/AMP to can connect to IEM via BT. You have any suggestions?
Unless ClieOS points out the BT set connected to the IEM is the biggest bottleneck.


----------



## dfung

ClieOS said:


> One has existed for quite some time: Elecom LBT-HPC1000RC


Wow. Wish I knew this one existed. What kind of features to look out for when comparing another BT set?  The kinds of codes one have?
Bought the MEE Audio BTX2. Not sure how this compares to the Elecom


----------



## pstickne (Jul 25, 2019)

dfung said:


> Good to know!  Right now leaning on a good DAC/AMP to can connect to IEM via BT. You have any suggestions?
> Unless ClieOS points out the BT set connected to the IEM is the biggest bottleneck.


It won’t be using the “DAC/AMP” if connecting to headphones via BT (the “DAC/AMP” converting to analog for the transducers will be in the headphone receiver itself). Do you mean “DAP”?

The “DAC/AMP” should generally be connected directly to the digital source. Be this source a standalone “DAP”, a music player on a phone, or digital/BT PC audio output etc.


----------



## dfung

pstickne said:


> It won’t be using the “DAC/AMP” if connecting to headphones via BT (the “DAC/AMP” converting to analog for the transducers will be in the headphone receiver itself). Do you mean “DAP”?
> 
> The “DAC/AMP” should generally be connected directly to the digital source. Be this source a standalone “DAP”, a music player on a phone, or digital/BT PC audio output etc.


So the DAC/AMP always outputs an analog signal? Hence, renders the point moot for connecting to BT headphones?  
Understand that the BT receiver converts the digital signal to analog for the IEMs.
But what if the DAC/AMP outputs a decent digital signal via a superior codec like LDAC and the BT receiver on the IEM also has LDAC?

Or this is simply not how DAC/AMP works?
Meaning DAC/AMPs always take in either digital or analog signal, then converts and outputs only analog?


----------



## ClieOS

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding, so lets break it down:



dfung said:


> This is very informative. Learned quite a bit here. Appreciate it!
> So would this set up improve sound quality instead？
> 1. DAC/AMP plugged to phone via cable
> 2. BT IEM connect to DAC/AMP via BT



The (2) is, again, *non logical *- as I have spent some effort on my previous reply to explain to you, such a thing doesn't exist. You CAN NOT connect a BT IEM (any BT headphone) to a DAC/AMP via BT. No chip maker even developed a BT chip that can allow for such function nor does any DC/AMP maker ever attempted to ever design such a thing. What you are asking on (2) is a fantasy setup that never exist before, nor even likely will.



dfung said:


> The assumption is the output from the DAC/AMP sends out digital signal and the BT headphones receive that same signal without going through a process of encoding and decoding.
> With the DAC/AMP having a superior BT codec, then that would improve the sound?
> Or is the bottleneck still with the BT set plugged to the IEM
> 
> For context, I have the MEE Audio BTX2 plugged to a pair of BGVP DM6



The output of any DAC/AMP is almost always analog signal (*there are exception with some also outputs SPDIF or Toslink, but *NEVER* BT). Your assumption is fundamentally based on an erroneous idea that never really exists in the real world.



dfung said:


> Good to know!  Right now leaning on a good DAC/AMP to can connect to IEM via BT. You have any suggestions?
> Unless ClieOS points out the BT set connected to the IEM is the biggest bottleneck.



Again, No such a thing as a "DAC/AMP to can connect to IEM via BT". You are asking people to suggest to you a thing that doesn't exist.

By 'DAC/AMP', we are referring to a headphone amp that also comes with a DAC - which is short for Digital-to-Analog Converter. As the full name suggested, it only does one thing: converting digital signal to analog, not the other way around. A DAC/AMP with BT function has one extra set of BT chip, which takes the BT signal (* = digital) from a smartphone or any BT source, and feed it into the DAC in order to convert it to analog signal, then the amp section amplifies the signal to feed it into the headphone - in *NO* way you can somehow magically turn any path of the process back into a BT signal unless you use an ADC (*analog-to-digital) circuit - but that will be extremely stupid. The reason is, as I have explained on my previous reply, doing so only cause degradation of signal due to multiple decode/re-encode. There is no benefit to make a device that purposefully decrease SQ when you can just send the BT signal from smartphone to the BT headphone directly.



dfung said:


> So the DAC/AMP always outputs an analog signal? Hence, renders the point moot for connecting to BT headphones?
> Understand that the BT receiver converts the digital signal to analog for the IEMs.
> But what if the DAC/AMP outputs a decent digital signal via a superior codec like LDAC and the BT receiver on the IEM also has LDAC?
> 
> ...



A DAC only takes digital and convert it to analog. An amp only take analog signal and amplifies it. You COMPLETELY misunderstand how a DAC/AMP works and just assume it will somehow magically convert whatever you want to any other signal you want - well, it doesn't work that way. 

-----------

In any setup, there will always be a bottleneck - for example, if you smartphone only output poor quality SBC codec over BT, somehow you use an BT enable DAC/AMP to convert it to analog signal, then you feed that analog signal into an ADC and resending it over BT (*such a device will be called a BT transmitter), perhaps even using LDAC, then your BT IEM received the LDAC signal and covert it back to analog and feed it to the transducer. 

Now the reality is your original music already suffer a lost of quality when it was first send over SBC, then it suffered a 2nd lost of quality when you using an ADC to convert the analog signal to back to digital, then another (minor) lost of quality by sending it over LDAC (note: even LDAC is not a completely lossless codec). Lastly, the DAC inside your BT IEM need to convert the LDAC back to analog and likely it is not going to be a very good DAC due to the size restriction of  the circuit inside the IEM, so another minor lost of quality there. In the end, what you really are getting is a process that results in the accumulation of four lost of quality. In comparison, you need suffer 2 lost of quality if you just connect your smartphone to your BT IEM directly.

The takeaway point is, you should stop trying to complicate your BT setup with non-existing dream-up device. The best way of is to get a LDAC enable smartphone and a LDAC enable IEM, then connect them directly. END OF STORY.


----------



## NotKunvinced

@dfung 
Your BTX2 can receive Aptx, so to get the best out of it you just need a smartphone that can transmit Aptx.


----------



## Hal Rockwell

@dfung, 

If you want to complecate things, you can use this dongle. If you don't have an LDAC enabled phone, but at least have an APTEX-HD enabled headset, you can connect this via USB OTG to your phone, and use it for transmitting Bluetooth, instead of your phone's built in Bluetooth chip.


----------



## dfung

ClieOS said:


> There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding, so lets break it down:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Appreciate it ClieOS! Thanks for putting up with my illogical, doomed quest on badgering other people for this fantasy device. Got way too hung up on this idea and thought anything is possible in 2019. Without doing some googling on the fundamentals first! LOL

Now I think it's a pretty good idea to get a BT adapter and skip the BTX2 altogether. Because I find the sound can be 'stronger' with more bass. (I have a pair of BGVP DM6) Hence, this thread.

Would you have any short and light copper cables to recommend? (Sorry, if this is not the most appropriate thread for that).

I'm kind of an active guy and always on the go.
Don't want to get my unit get trampled on the treadmill because the cable is too long and cumbersome.


----------



## dfung

Hal Rockwell said:


> @dfung,
> 
> If you want to complecate things, you can use this dongle. If you don't have an LDAC enabled phone, but at least have an APTEX-HD enabled headset, you can connect this via USB OTG to your phone, and use it for transmitting Bluetooth, instead of your phone's built in Bluetooth chip.


Thanks for the info! Very glad my phone has LDAC. So now I can go on my quest to find a premium BT adapter for my IEMs


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 26, 2019)

dfung said:


> Would you have any short and light copper cables to recommend? (Sorry, if this is not the most appropriate thread for that).
> 
> I'm kind of an active guy and always on the go.
> Don't want to get my unit get trampled on the treadmill because the cable is too long and cumbersome.



I build my own short cable. Pretty sure any cable maker can make them to any length you like, but generally I'll recommend it to be around 50cm or so.


----------



## dfung

ClieOS said:


> I build my own short cable. Pretty sure any cable make can make them to any length you like, but generally I'll recommend it to be around 50cm or so.


That's really cool that you make your own cable.
Eyeing the BTR5. It seems most here are quite hyped up about it


----------



## tiamor988 (Jul 29, 2019)

Fiio Russia have share this.


----------



## nuggetbro

And I just ordered an UP2!

I imagine this is going to be a lot more expensive then the BTR3, seeing as it has balanced and unbalanced as well as a ton of other features. Maybe around the ES100 price range ($99 USD). Honestly I would say it would be even more expensive then that, but guess we will have to wait and see.


----------



## tiamor988

nuggetbro said:


> And I just ordered an UP2!
> 
> I imagine this is going to be a lot more expensive then the BTR3, seeing as it has balanced and unbalanced as well as a ton of other features. Maybe around the ES100 price range ($99 USD). Honestly I would say it would be even more expensive then that, but guess we will have to wait and see.


Probably going for $125. Almost ordered the UP2 as well last week, but the USB DAC functionality let me down as I'm looking for pluging with my laptop and wirelessly with my phone.


----------



## nuggetbro

What you mean about the USB DAC part? Is there a problem with it?


----------



## tiamor988

nuggetbro said:


> What you mean about the USB DAC part? Is there a problem with it?


Only support 16bit/48khz.


----------



## Hal Rockwell

BTR5 will probably be a smaller version of Q1, with Bluetooth capabilities.


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 29, 2019)

Just about everything that is to be expected from BTR5 is there. Double sided  glass means it will probably come with an outer jacket for shirt clip, much like UP2. The addition of a small OLED screen is a nice touch, reminds me a lot about the Sony MW1 that I really love. The only surprising bit is the support of CTIA remote on headset. AFAIK, this will mark the first ever BY adapter that can support remote control on the headset.

Can't wait to get one!


----------



## caprimulgus (Jul 29, 2019)

Fiio (facebook) has posted it too (bold is my emphasis):

BTR5: Flagship Bluetooth Amplifier

Features:
1. *Detachable back clip*
2. 3.5mm (Single-Ended) + 2.5mm (Balanced)
3. Dual ES9218P DAC chip
4. Built-in XMOS chip
5. Supports native DSD decoding

Scheduled to be release in *September/October* (subjected to change)

Estimated SRP at *USD 99.99* (subjected to final confirmation)​


----------



## nuggetbro

Nioce noice noice. Looks like my UP2 may be collecting dust in the back of my audio graveyard draw. 

Will wait for reviews, but love my K3 so no doubt I will love this as well. 

$99 seems pretty cheap for something that can do all this, but I guess it has to be priced below the M6?


----------



## ClieOS

nuggetbro said:


> $99 seems pretty cheap for something that can do all this, but I guess it has to be priced below the M6?



You mean M5.


----------



## nuggetbro

Sorry yeah, that makes more sense


----------



## caprimulgus

Only downside of the BTR5 for me is that the size is significantly bigger than the BTR3/UP2. (But I guess that's the price of putting in the balanced output, etc!)

Anyways, looks good, can't wait!


----------



## Ocelitgol

Looks like my ES100 can finally retire to the car audio system


----------



## Cevisi

stormers said:


> Looks like my ES100 can finally retire to the car audio system


it is godlike for the car i love. i get q5s tomorrow then my es 100 will get my clip it on your underwaer and sleep listening to some smooth stuff jazz or animal documentations


----------



## caprimulgus (Jul 31, 2019)

Some more stuff on BTR5 on twitter/weibo:

Family comparison:
https://twitter.com/align_centre/status/1155850136020324352

Positioning of BTR5 (less functions than M5, but higher quality and higher price than M5):
https://twitter.com/align_centre/status/1142097078362898433

Hands on pictures of BTR5 and clip:
https://twitter.com/align_centre/status/1155088737186934785


----------



## ClieOS

Added Habigis X3 to the list


----------



## tiamor988

caprimulgus said:


> Some more stuff on BTR5 on twitter/weibo:
> 
> Family comparison:
> https://twitter.com/align_centre/status/1155850136020324352
> ...


Probably going to cost more than the $99.99 suggested price. The price for M5 is $109.99 if not mistaken. My bet the price is $125.


----------



## amgupt01 (Aug 1, 2019)

I'm trying to figure out the *shortest possible cables/adapters *for the Type-C DACs that also support wired functionality.

I've found quite a few 6-inch USB Type-C-to-Type-C cables that are compliant with USB 2.0. The shortest Type-C-to-Type-C cables compliant with USB 3.1 I could find are 1-foot long. Is there a benefit to USB 2.0 vs 3.1 compliant cables for these?

Additionally, are there any super-short cables or adapters that let you use USB Type-C accessories with an iPhone?

EDIT: Looking for USB-C to USB-C and/or Lightning to USB-C! Sorry for not being clear!


----------



## tiamor988

amgupt01 said:


> I'm trying to figure out the *shortest possible cables/adapters *for the Type-C DACs that also support wired functionality.
> 
> I've found quite a few 6-inch USB Type-C cables that are compliant with USB 2.0, but the shortest 3.1 cables I could find are 1-foot long. Is there a benefit to USB 2.0 vs 3.1 compliant cables for these?
> 
> Additionally, are there any super-short cables or adapters that let you use USB Type-C accessories with an iPhone?


I'm not sure where you are from, but from aliexpress you could order the Ugreen type C cable. They have a 0.25m version. I have one. It' great. You are searching for type c to regular usb right?


----------



## amgupt01

tiamor988 said:


> I'm not sure where you are from, but from aliexpress you could order the Ugreen type C cable. They have a 0.25m version. I have one. It' great. You are searching for type c to regular usb right?


Oof, I should have been more clear! I'm looking for USB-C to USB-C and/or Lightning to USB-C! Edited my original post


----------



## tiamor988

amgupt01 said:


> Oof, I should have been more clear! I'm looking for USB-C to USB-C and/or Lightning to USB-C! Edited my original post


There also USB-C to lightning by ugreen. 0.25m the shortest. I'm not sure it's USB 3.1 or USB 2.0


----------



## amgupt01

tiamor988 said:


> There also USB-C to lightning by ugreen. 0.25m the shortest. I'm not sure it's USB 3.1 or USB 2.0


Nice, thanks! 

Does anyone have experience using a USB-C to Lightning cable with the Fiio BTR3 or similar? I'm trying to figure out if that would work, or if I need something like the bulky Lightning Camera Adapter instead.


----------



## ClieOS

amgupt01 said:


> I'm trying to figure out the *shortest possible cables/adapters *for the Type-C DACs that also support wired functionality.
> 
> I've found quite a few 6-inch USB Type-C-to-Type-C cables that are compliant with USB 2.0. The shortest Type-C-to-Type-C cables compliant with USB 3.1 I could find are 1-foot long. Is there a benefit to USB 2.0 vs 3.1 compliant cables for these?
> 
> ...




First of, you don't need USB 3.0. USB Audio Class 2.0 devices (which included just about any USB DAC out there, not to mentioned the slower USB Audio Class 1.0 devices) can be ran just fine under USB 2.0 speed, even DSD doesn't need more than USB 2.0 speed. For example, a typical 5 minutes DSD will be about 400MB, while USB 2.0 is capable of 480MBits/s (or = 60MB/s) - so in theory, it will only take 400/60 = 6.7 seconds to sync a 5 minutes DSD files over USB 2.0. Some manufacturers might choose to implement USB 3.0+ on their USB DAC, but that's mostly because it is trendy and convenient to do so but not because it will benefit SQ or speed wise. Many, if not most of the DAC that uses USB 3.0+ or Type-C are actually only wired as USB 2.0 internally.

That being said - no, you don't need an USB 3.1 compliant cable for your USB DAC, and most certainly you don't need one for BTR3. BTR3 internally only supports USB 2.0 as the CSR chipset it used doesn't support USB 3.1 (nor has any reason to support it anyway).

Secondly - more specifically on iPhone - it doesn't take any Type-C accessories directly because Apple designs it that way (*well, Apple get a small cut from every licensed product others sold, so they want to limit the ecosystem to only what they officially licensed). Most USB DAC either needs to get MFi certificated chip or go through the Camera Connection Kit. A very few manufacturers also choose to use hacked chip, but FiiO as an official Apple licensee will never risk their license to do such a thing, while putting a MFi chip in BTR3 makes no sense since it is meant as a Bluetooth devices first and foremost (as mentioned, each manufacturer need to pay Apple for each MFi chip used). As such trying to get a Lightning-to-Type-C isn't likely going to work since the USB DAC itself needs to have the MFi (or hacked) chip built-in first. While Camera Connection Kit can somewhat solve the problem (as it has a MFi chip inside), it is bulky to use and probably not worth trying on a small devices like BTR3.

So the long story short for you Apple users - sorry, the is no easy cure. You can blame Jobs / Cook for that.


----------



## ClieOS

One a side note, if you are handy enough, you can build a very short cable. This particular one that I built myself is Type-C (male) to USB-A (female) meant for connecting FiiO M6 to iFi xDSD, and it is less than 3CM in length.


----------



## amgupt01

ClieOS said:


> Secondly - more specifically on iPhone - it doesn't take any Type-C accessories directly because Apple designs it that way (*well, Apple get a small cut from every licensed product others sold, so they want to limit the ecosystem to only what they officially licensed). Most USB DAC either needs to get MFi certificated chip or go through the Camera Connection Kit. A very few manufacturers also choose to use hacked chip, but FiiO as an official Apple licensee will never risk their license to do such a thing, while putting a MFi chip in BTR3 makes no sense since it is meant as a Bluetooth devices first and foremost (as mentioned, each manufacturer need to pay Apple for each MFi chip used). As such trying to get a Lightning-to-Type-C isn't likely going to work since the USB DAC itself needs to have the MFi (or hacked) chip built-in first. While Camera Connection Kit can somewhat solve the problem (as it has a MFi chip inside), it is bulky to use and probably not worth trying on a small devices like BTR3.
> 
> So the long story short for you Apple users - sorry, the is no easy cure. You can blame Jobs / Cook for that.



Damn, thanks for that super-detailed breakdown.

I was (naively) hoping that using an MFi Lightning-to-Type-C cable would solve the problem, but I guess the BTR3 itself needs to be MFi certified. Do you know of any Lightning-to-Type-C cables with hacked chips that might make things work similarly to the CCK?


----------



## ClieOS (Aug 2, 2019)

amgupt01 said:


> Damn, thanks for that super-detailed breakdown.
> 
> I was (naively) hoping that using an MFi Lightning-to-Type-C cable would solve the problem, but I guess the BTR3 itself needs to be MFi certified. Do you know of any Lightning-to-Type-C cables with hacked chips that might make things work similarly to the CCK?



Actually the easiest possible solution I can think of might be to take an official CCK and mod it with a Type-C connector. There are 'naked' PCB only Lightning connector on Taobao that claims to have the official MFi chip inside though I am not sure how real that is. Those can be turned into a Lightning-to-Type-C cable fairly easily.

There are a few seller on Taobao that sold the latter, so it probably will work. Not really sure Aliexpress has those one or not.


----------



## amgupt01

ClieOS said:


> Actually the easiest possible solution I can think of might be to take an official CCK and mod it with a Type-C connector. There are 'naked' PCB only Lightning connector on Taobao that claims to have the official MFi chip inside though I am not sure how real that is. Those can be turned into a Lightning-to-Type-C cable fairly easily.
> 
> There are a few seller on Taobao that sold the latter, so it probably will work. Not really sure Aliexpress has those one or not.


Iiiiiinteresting.  Any tips on what to search up to find one of those chips and how to go about doing it?


----------



## ClieOS

amgupt01 said:


> Iiiiiinteresting.  Any tips on what to search up to find one of those chips and how to go about doing it?



Don't know about Aliexpress, but they pop up everywhere if you search 'lightning mfi 插头' on Taobao。

You can also try to find one that is made by Zephone. It is a fairly well recognized cable brand in China.


----------



## Lohb

Any ES9038Q2M based units out there ? 
For the coming balanced Fiio unit, spec-wise is the older Sabre chip 'better' ?


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> Any ES9038Q2M based units out there ?
> For the coming balanced Fiio unit, spec-wise is the older Sabre chip 'better' ?



ES9038Q2M is a DAC only chip. You will need to add a headphone driving chip after it and that makes it much less ideal to use in a battery powered very small devices such as BT adapter when compared to, said ES9218P that has the DAC and amp all built into one chip. I'll say implementation is far more important than a simple comparison over spec.


----------



## Lohb (Aug 5, 2019)

Managed to cancel UP2 after luckily finding this thread yesterday. 
Will hold off for BTR5, don't think even on balanced it will bring out potential of Sony XBA-N3s (think they need about 250-300mWatts per channel headroom to shine..though raw power only 1 part of the equation) but the Fiio FH5 might be an easier to drive hybrid pairing looking at its Ohm/sensitivity rating vs N3.

Wish the new unit designers could bring a meatier balanced output again (300mWatts headroom per channel) by upping the batteries capacity...simple replaceable batteries like hearing aids have would be good - as these portables will be getting charged daily for commuters etc...and then its battery life is nuked to 50% or lower after what, 1.5 years ?


----------



## Lohb

BTR5 short impressions...
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/canjam-london-2019-impressions-thread.911785/page-3#post-15086882


----------



## dfung

Anybody have any ideas on how the BTR5 compares to the M5?  Are they similar in specs?


----------



## tiamor988

dfung said:


> Anybody have any ideas on how the BTR5 compares to the M5?  Are they similar in specs?


----------



## vnmslsrbms

Wow looking forward to the BTR5.  Should be exactly what I'm looking for!


----------



## Lohb

BTR5 should be showing up on aliX soon...


----------



## tiamor988

Lohb said:


> BTR5 should be showing up on aliX soon...


Isn't it delay until end of sept?


----------



## Lohb

tiamor988 said:


> Isn't it delay until end of sept?


UGH, really....more finger-drumming till then.


----------



## Hal Rockwell

My review of Artextreme R3. In short - DON'T BUY IT!!!


----------



## Ynot1 (Aug 27, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> ES9038Q2M is a DAC only chip. You will need to add a headphone driving chip after it and that makes it much less ideal to use in a battery powered very small devices such as BT adapter when compared to, said ES9218P that has the DAC and amp all built into one chip. I'll say implementation is far more important than a simple comparison over spec.



E1DA

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/e1da-9038s-usb-dac.913625/


----------



## ClieOS

Ynot1 said:


> E1DA
> 
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/e1da-9038s-usb-dac.913625/



Not sure what you are trying to say, but that isn't a BT adapter that this thread is for.


----------



## tiamor988

ClieOS said:


> Not sure what you are trying to say, but that isn't a BT adapter that this thread is for.


Probably he said that 9038 can come in small form factor. E1DA 9038s suck so much battery from phone. They even provide with the Y-splitter USB cable so it can be powered with powerbank. It's not ideal for bluetooth adapter. If a bluetooth adapter can run only 1-2 hour than it's not ideal.


----------



## 511634 (Aug 30, 2019)

Seems pointless to make a separate thread so I'll mention it here as I think it does tie in slightly with all these devices. I'm talking specifically about Bluetooth 5, aptX HD transmitters with optical input and without a DAC. I think it will be a while before consumer devices (not adapters) start having Bluetooth 5 and aptX HD be the new standard.

PC / TV / Receiver / Speakers etc. with optical output -> cable to transmitter(which I'll mention below) -> receiver adapters in this thread
In my personal use case which I'll keep brief, at work I want to be wireless with my IEM's. Why not go wired? Because I don't want a cable in the way of my typing hands and keyboard. At home, for my media room, this one is even more easy to make an argument for. Most people don't upgrade their TV's, speakers, receivers etc. that often and all their current gear plus any gear they buy in the near future will most likely not support Bluetooth 5 and aptX HD. You'll need these low cost transmitters. Maybe some will argue just buy 2 BTR5's for example and I'd like to hear people's thoughts on it. Some considerations: will battery life degradation play a part compared to some of these transmitters that are not battery operated meaning they'll work the same on day 1 as they will 5 years later. Also, auto on/off, need to research this one more as I think it's model specific.

All of these hi-res adapters are great, but there should in my opinion be at least a very brief mention of some respected and compatible desktop / home audio transmitter solutions as well. I currently own the BTR3 and am glad I stumbled into this thread as now I know I'll be upgrading to a BTR5 in October. With the BTR3 and a Avantree Oasis Plus (aptX HD compatible, however only Bluetooth 4.2), I'm not happy with my setup as I know I can squeeze a bit more out of my IEM's with a BTR5 but also out of the transmitter -> receiver connection. The problem is there is a lot of transmitters out there but they're almost all from questionable companies. Take a look at Amazon, there's some really cheap, ugly ones. My favorite is their marketing pictures look from 10 years ago. Customer support from them? I wouldn't risk it. FiiO for example responds to my emails within 24 hours, I respect that. I'm looking into one Monoprice makes but they haven't replied to my question of which Qualcomm chipset they're using (it is Bluetooth 5 so maybe my question is irrelevant). Theirs however is battery powered so not sure how 5 years from now it will work.


----------



## ClieOS

List updated: Shanling UP4


----------



## tiamor988

Looks like Shanling MW200 also fit the bill for Hi-Res bluetooth adapter.


----------



## Lohb

Tricky now to decide on Shanling UP4 or Fiio BTR5....


----------



## ballog

Lohb said:


> Tricky now to decide on Shanling UP4 or Fiio BTR5....


Quite right. Its a dilemma. Unfortunately we don't know the price of either.


----------



## tiamor988

Lohb said:


> Tricky now to decide on Shanling UP4 or Fiio BTR5....


The USB DAC on UP4 limited to 16bit/48khz and the BTR5 higher bitrate and DSD (if you into that). If you just use it as bluetooth adapter it should just be fine. I plan to use them as bluetooth when I'm out and USB DAC when I'm at home. But I'm sure the price for UP4 going to be cheaper. I saw the pre-order price of the BTR5 kept increasing.


----------



## ClieOS

tiamor988 said:


> The USB DAC on UP4 limited to 16bit/48khz and the BTR5 higher bitrate and DSD (if you into that). If you just use it as bluetooth adapter it should just be fine. I plan to use them as bluetooth when I'm out and USB DAC when I'm at home. But I'm sure the price for UP4 going to be cheaper. I saw the pre-order price of the BTR5 kept increasing.



A lot of these are just hearsay. From what we do know so far, the two share very similar hardware, and the only thing we can say in some certainty is that FiiO has better app support, given Shanling has yet to release any.


----------



## Ynot1 (Sep 3, 2019)

I wish more bluetooth receivers can also do transmit of the relevant ones for enthusiasts like LDAC, Aptx HD and Aptx LL.
Additionally I wish usb DAC meant that you can use usb dongled dacs so that you can use a variety of DACs to match the variety of iems.
Further additionally I wish there was bidirectional optical input/output at half the cost. I'm thinking wishing is a good thing.


----------



## 511634

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B07PM9MXSQ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Not sure where you are, that's for Amazon Canada. Not a DAC though, just a transmitter/receiver. Look into the BTR5 by FiiO for a wireless DAC receiver.


----------



## Lohb

Think I'm just going to go for the Fiio BTR5...I guess either one may be bit a buggy with their control apps anyway. 
Not much between the two in hardware specs, but I think I prefer the separate buttons on the Fiio vs Shanling..never used these all-in-one buttons on Shanling DAPs etc before.


----------



## peter123

There's also this one on the horizon:

https://www.qudelix.com/5k-dacamp

On of the people behind the company is the former CTO of Radsone.....


----------



## Lohb (Sep 7, 2019)

@peter123 there from the Chifi LZa2/a3/a3s/a4 mania days... 
OPA1622 on that Qudelix BT adapter above..._stellar detail retrieval and neutrality_ (wrt DAC incoming tonality) and common mode noise rejection...almost as good as discrete amp chips performance...Have a couple of those chips on an ES9038Q2M chip rolling board...

..AND it has true DAC-out (bypassing the amp chip) reading the specs list to the bottom.

EDIT : weird how its only using the DAC chip on 2.5" balanced-out but you have option of
- DAC or DAC + amp chip on single-end...


----------



## peter123

Lohb said:


> @peter123 there from the Chifi LZa2/a3/a3s/a4 mania days...
> OPA1622 on that Qudelix BT adapter above..._stellar detail retrieval and neutrality_ (wrt DAC incoming tonality) and common mode noise rejection...almost as good as discrete amp chips performance...Have a couple of those chips on an ES9038Q2M chip rolling board...
> 
> ..AND it has true DAC-out (bypassing the amp chip) reading the specs list to the bottom.
> ...



Don't forget about the LZ A6, my all time favorite IEM's but it's quite new though  

Always nice to see a familiar name in here. 

This is most definitely an interesting device, I'm very impressed with the ES100 but this 5k looks like the next generation devic. From what I understand retail price will be $99 for this one also and estimated release date is early next year.


----------



## gr8soundz

peter123 said:


> There's also this one on the horizon:
> 
> https://www.qudelix.com/5k-dacamp
> 
> On of the people behind the company is the former CTO of Radsone.....



Thanks for posting this!

Been waiting for aptx Adaptive forever.....


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 7, 2019)

peter123 said:


> There's also this one on the horizon:
> 
> https://www.qudelix.com/5k-dacamp
> 
> On of the people behind the company is the former CTO of Radsone.....



List updated. Thanks for the info.



Lohb said:


> ..AND it has true DAC-out (bypassing the amp chip) reading the specs list to the bottom.
> 
> EDIT : weird how its only using the DAC chip on 2.5" balanced-out but you have option of
> - DAC or DAC + amp chip on single-end...



A few things:

(1) It will not be a 'true' DAC-out (or line-out if that's what we commonly refer to), as AK4377a doesn't offer a line-out signal. It only has one audio output and it is the headphone-out from its built-in amp section. That means OPA1622 is essentially double amping.

(2) If you look at what @peter123 thread on the K5 and look at the PCB design, it only has one OPA1622. To use OPA1622 on balanced, you will need two OPA1622. My guess is that that will be fairly unpractical since the voltage will be way too high that you will need to further increase your power supply section as well as your battery size just so you can barely drive a handful of very difficult to drive full sized can.


----------



## FinBenton

Im trying to make my HD58X wireless for PC use as I didnt find any wireless headphones that fit my needs for many things, can you guys suggest me on adapter for powering these, low latency would be great!


----------



## peter123

FinBenton said:


> Im trying to make my HD58X wireless for PC use as I didnt find any wireless headphones that fit my needs for many things, can you guys suggest me on adapter for powering these, low latency would be great!



ES100 works great with the HD58X imo.


----------



## ClieOS

Hiby W3 added to the list. No more problematic touch control amd barely useable shirt clip - I'll call that a win.


----------



## Shotgun.Preacher

ClieOS said:


> Hiby W3 added to the list. No more problematic touch control amd barely useable shirt clip - I'll call that a win.


Cool! Can you share any pics or specs? Can't find any info


----------



## ClieOS

Shotgun.Preacher said:


> Cool! Can you share any pics or specs? Can't find any info



In Chinese, but the basic stuff is quite understandable: https://www.weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404415035270103356


----------



## Poleepkwa

I do like where these adapters are going. The ES100 has been a great device (even with its quirks). Unfortunately Ido not have expandable storage on my phone.
So I have been looking to get the Shanling M0 too complement my ES100 for local storage. @ClieOS , you have extensive experience with both. How are these 2 comparable soundwise?


----------



## Shotgun.Preacher

Poleepkwa said:


> So I have been looking to get the Shanling M0 too complement my ES100 for local storage.


Hey, have you considered FiiO M5 instead of M0? Word is it sounds slightly better. And you can use it as a Bluetooth receiver as well as a DAP in case of emergencies


----------



## Poleepkwa

Shotgun.Preacher said:


> Hey, have you considered FiiO M5 instead of M0? Word is it sounds slightly better. And you can use it as a Bluetooth receiver as well as a DAP in case of emergencies


Thanks. I will look into that too. The M0 on papers seems to be more powerful though.


----------



## peter123

Shotgun.Preacher said:


> Hey, have you considered FiiO M5 instead of M0? Word is it sounds slightly better. And you can use it as a Bluetooth receiver as well as a DAP in case of emergencies



This is a strange post to me, do you recommend a device you've not heard over another device you've not heard? If so it seems pretty meaningless. 

FIY the M0 does also act like a Bluetooth receiver (and transmitter)......


----------



## ClieOS

Poleepkwa said:


> I do like where these adapters are going. The ES100 has been a great device (even with its quirks). Unfortunately Ido not have expandable storage on my phone.
> So I have been looking to get the Shanling M0 too complement my ES100 for local storage. @ClieOS , you have extensive experience with both. How are these 2 comparable soundwise?



Only have the Shanling M1. But it is a much older DAP so comparison probably won't mean much. Generally speaking, Shanling makes fairly good DAP. Not neccesery better but still comparable to the competitions.

Note as mentioned, Shanling M0 won't be able to take call but FiiO M5 can.


----------



## Shotgun.Preacher

peter123 said:


> This is a strange post to me, do you recommend a device you've not heard over another device you've not heard? If so it seems pretty meaningless.
> 
> FIY the M0 does also act like a Bluetooth receiver (and transmitter)......


I own an M5 and I like it. Also, M0’s supported codec list is very short, whereas M5 supports pretty much all of ‘em. 
Also, M5 has 3 hardware buttons instead of a clickable wheel, this might be important for some


----------



## peter123

Shotgun.Preacher said:


> I own an M5 and I like it. Also, M0’s supported codec list is very short, whereas M5 supports pretty much all of ‘em.
> Also, M5 has 3 hardware buttons instead of a clickable wheel, this might be important for some



AFAIK the M0 support LDAC, Aptx(HD) and AAC. I don't see what other codec one would need. 

Are you working for FiiO?


----------



## Shanling

Shotgun.Preacher said:


> I own an M5 and I like it. Also, M0’s supported codec list is very short, whereas M5 supports pretty much all of ‘em.
> Also, M5 has 3 hardware buttons instead of a clickable wheel, this might be important for some



M0 as BT receiver supports AAC(for iPhones), LDAC (for any modern Android) and SBC. 

Lack of aptX LL is unfortunate for movies.


----------



## caprimulgus

peter123 said:


> I don't see what other codec one would need.





Shanling said:


> Lack of aptX LL is unfortunate for movies.



Are you working for FiiO? 

But yeah, 100% - I need AptX-LL (for gaming / movies).


----------



## tiamor988

I know lot's of us waiting for the BTR5. Here something James share 2 weeks ago.



 
https://m.weibo.cn/status/I5dgrD3Yt?jumpfrom=weibocom


----------



## Nolbert0

that's the current design of the btr5? looks way different to the one I saw at CanJam London


----------



## ClieOS

Good news for those who are waiting for BTR5 - FiiO just confirms pre-order in China will begin in next few days.


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 26, 2019)

Another quick update, estimated price for BTR5 is around $99.

P/s: dual clocks (crystal oscillators) and FPGA.


----------



## acygni

Its amazing to see the btr5 finally being released. They withheld it for close to a year to avoid eating into their own market with the q5s, m5, etc. But now the Qudelix-5K is also coming. The 5K will make the btr5 irrelevant in a few months unless it gets a decent price cut. Kinda want to see Fiio eat the consequence of their strategy. You can't just win both sides.


----------



## ClieOS

acygni said:


> Its amazing to see the btr5 finally being released. They withheld it for close to a year to avoid eating into their own market with the q5s, m5, etc. But now the Qudelix-5K is also coming. The 5K will make the btr5 irrelevant in a few months unless it gets a decent price cut. Kinda want to see Fiio eat the consequence of their strategy. You can't just win both sides.



You kinda lost me there on the timing. As I recalled, We first heard of BTR5 around March (which turn out to be a mix-up with M5). The first ETA was set on July, then pushes back to September.  So at most we were only waiting for BTR5 for 6 months.  

As for relevancy - I think we need to look back the case on BTR3 vs. ES100. By all mean ES100 is better than BTR3, but there are still people buying BTR3 nonetheless. It isn't just the price difference but also ES100 is actually not that easy to buy outside of a few region. For example, my ES100 is a grey import from the U.S., so I have to pay extra for shipping (and risk custom tax as well) while warranty could be an issue. On the other hand, FiiO has much better market coverage across the world and make it a less risky buy for many. I suspect Qudelix might have the same issue as EarStudio where audiophile will pick it up on a heart beat but more casual user are likely go for something more accessible in their local market.


----------



## acygni

ClieOS said:


> You kinda lost me there on the timing. As I recalled, We first heard of BTR5 around March (which turn out to be a mix-up with M5). The first ETA was set on July, then pushes back to September.  So at most we were only waiting for BTR5 for 6 months.
> 
> As for relevancy - I think we need to look back the case on BTR3 vs. ES100. By all mean ES100 is better than BTR3, but there are still people buying BTR3 nonetheless. It isn't just the price difference but also ES100 is actually not that easy to buy outside of a few region. For example, my ES100 is a grey import from the U.S., so I have to pay extra for shipping (and risk custom tax as well) while warranty could be an issue. On the other hand, FiiO has much better market coverage across the world and make it a less risky buy for many. I suspect Qudelix might have the same issue as EarStudio where audiophile will pick it up on a heart beat but more casual user are likely go for something more accessible in their local market.


The BTR5's info and a teaser video was released in Chinese social media about the same time as the event for the m5&m11's announcement. People here were just confusing the details with the M5. The first release date was also May. The btr3 vs es100 comparison is not valid as the es100 is a better and more expansive product while the 5k is a better product but will cost the same as the btr5. Not sure about the rest of the world but both the ES100 and Fiio products are shipped by Amazon on Amazon US and they are everywhere on Taobao for China.


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 26, 2019)

acygni said:


> The BTR5's info and a teaser video was released in Chinese social media about the same time as the event for the m5&m11's announcement. People here were just confusing the details with the M5. The first release date was also May. The btr3 vs es100 comparison is not valid as the es100 is a better and more expansive product while the 5k is a better product but will cost the same as the btr5. Not sure about the rest of the world but both the ES100 and Fiio products are shipped by Amazon on Amazon US and they are everywhere on Taobao for China.



No one has heard the final version of 5K nor BTR5 yet, so I won't be too quick to judge simply based on a few line of spec.

Also, plenty of good audio products out there, but not all of the companies that make them will thrive. Good product and good business is not necessary the same thing.


----------



## acygni

ClieOS said:


> No one has heard the final version of 5K nor BTR5 yet, so I won't be too quick to judge simply based on a few line of spec.


We can estimate the btr5 with all the LG phones even all the way back to the V20. They all use multi 9128. As for the 5k's dual 4377 it could be close to the m5 but I don't think its much of an advantage anyway. I think the most significant improvement over the btr5 is that the 5k uses the qcc5124 which is much more efficient and capable than the older csr8675. It also adds all the aptx standards even aptx adaptive.


----------



## ClieOS

acygni said:


> We can estimate the btr5 with all the LG phones even all the way back to the V20. They all use multi 9128. As for the 5k's dual 4377 it could be close to the m5 but I don't think its much of an advantage anyway. I think the most significant improvement over the btr5 is that the 5k uses the qcc5124 which is much more efficient and capable than the older csr8675. It also adds all the aptx standards even aptx adaptive.


 
I'll believe it when I hear it. Circuit design and implement are just as important as what chips were used, if not more so. That much I have learned.


----------



## episiarch

I heard the BTR5 at CanJam London in July. At that point it was in at least late-prototype form — it looked and behaved like a finished product. At that point they were expecting it in October.

On my ER4-SR, BTR5 was simply superior to BTR3. Some of this may be down to the 4377 vs. whatever BTR3 has, but much is attributable simply to output power. The ER4-SR (like every Ety I've tried) really rewards proper amplification, and BTR3 is not at the level to drive with authority and transparency. BTR5 is.  (This was single-ended, BTW.)

Of course I don't know whether the final production version will match the really sample I heard, but if the price is in the $99 range mentioned earlier, I expect to take the leap.


----------



## tiamor988

ClieOS said:


> Another quick update, estimated price for BTR5 is around $99.
> 
> P/s: dual clocks (crystal oscillators) and FPGA.


Just saw that you also from Malaysia. You'll get the one from taobao? Fiio price here is very different from China. The Q1MK2 is same price for China and Malaysia. But the Fiio M5 and BTR3 is cheaper in China. I hope the price for the BTR5 would be the same with Q1MK2.


----------



## ClieOS

tiamor988 said:


> Just saw that you also from Malaysia. You'll get the one from taobao? Fiio price here is very different from China. The Q1MK2 is same price for China and Malaysia. But the Fiio M5 and BTR3 is cheaper in China. I hope the price for the BTR5 would be the same with Q1MK2.



Always get my Chinese gears from China. Most of the time it is faster and cheaper than way.


----------



## ballog

@ClieOS this https://ebay.to/2lXOOcp looks quite unique and interesting - especially with balanced 4.4mm. Unfortunately I can't find any info online - Oriolus 1795.


----------



## gr8soundz

ballog said:


> @ClieOS this https://ebay.to/2lXOOcp looks quite unique and interesting - especially with balanced 4.4mm. Unfortunately I can't find any info online - Oriolus 1795.



I have 2 Oriolus amps and thought I knew about their entire lineup but this is amp comes out of nowhere. Thanks for posting the link.


----------



## ClieOS

ballog said:


> @ClieOS this https://ebay.to/2lXOOcp looks quite unique and interesting - especially with balanced 4.4mm. Unfortunately I can't find any info online - Oriolus 1795.



Thanks for the info. Will add it to the list later.


----------



## ballog

ClieOS said:


> Thanks for the info. Will add it to the list later.


@ClieOS would appreciate if you could dig some info about the Oriolus 1795.


----------



## tiamor988 (Sep 27, 2019)

ballog said:


> @ClieOS would appreciate if you could dig some info about the Oriolus 1795.


The only link I can get for Oriolus 1795.

https://weibointl.api.weibo.cn/share/91912698.html?weibo_id=4415704360615259

https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?sp...W1HT2&id=603197459598&ns=1&abbucket=12#detail

Found the product in taobao. Looks like it has two version. (4.4mm balance + 3.5mm SE) and (3.5mm balance + 2.5mm balance + 3.5mm SE).

It has wireless charging too. Add 1 yuan for 3.5mm 2 pin  balance cable


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 27, 2019)

Here is some of the important bits on Oriolus 1795:

Qualcomm CSR8675 (BT chip) + TI PCM1795 (DAC) + AKM AK4125VF (SRC, upsampling to 24/192)

Two versions:
(1) 4.4mm balanced + 3.5mm SE
(2) 2.5mm balanced + 3.5mm balanced (3.5PRO) + 3.5mm SE

Note that 3.5mm balanced follows the newer Chinese 3.5PRO standard. Older 3.5mm balanced plug might not able to use it.

SE spec:
Power: 150mW @ 32ohm
Distortion: 0.008% @ 1kHz
SNR: 110dB @ 1kHz A weighted

Balanced spec:
Power: 220mW @ 32ohm
Distortion: 0.006% @ 1kHz
SNR: 112dB @ 1kHz A weighted

Size: 96 * 41 * 15mm
Weight: 109g
Battery life: >7hrs SBC/AAC
Aluminium frame with front/back glass.

Price is rather high at around $235.


----------



## acygni

With almost the same output specs as the btr5/up4/5k, lower battery life, heavier, bigger, but more than double the price. The Oriolus 1795 better sounds like heaven in practice. Guess there are reasons why not many ppl has heard about it.


----------



## ClieOS

A bit more official spec on BTR5:

Qualcomm CSR8675 BT chip
Dual ESS ES8218P DAC/amp
Dual clocks with FPGA clock management for jitter reduction
Xmos XUF208 SoC
384kHz / DSD256 hardware decoding via USB DAC, asynchronous UAC2.0
2.5D font/back glasses with OLED display (0.49inches, 64 x 32)
3.5mm single-ended + 2.5mm balanced output
Controllable via FiiO app
Setting (Filters, EQ ,etc) controllable via buttons.
NFC supported
220mW @ 32ohm, 7.6Vpp @ 300ohm (balanced)
Hardware High/Low gain + digital volume control
9hrs (single-ended) or 7hrs (balanced) battery life


----------



## tiamor988

The pre-sale for Fiio BTR5 already start at taobao.

https://detail.tmall.com/item.htm?s...9078511&scene=taobao_shop&skuId=4228688708361


----------



## Lohb (Sep 30, 2019)

Not sure about PCM1795, but HRT microStreamer - (PCM1793 segemented current dac) was an amazing little DAC to my ears..less detail than Sabre new stuff but it had a great/sweet tonality.

BTR5 still not avail on aliX eBay etc....uuuuuuh...so long to wait for it.

(Not sure what the 3different price levels inidicate for BTR5 on taobao.....)


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 30, 2019)

Lohb said:


> ...
> BTR5 still not avail on aliX eBay etc....uuuuuuh...so long to wait for it.
> 
> (Not sure what the 3different price levels inidicate for BTR5 on taobao.....)



Delivery in China won't start till late October, as the first week of October is China's National Day holidays and many will be off till sometime second week. Not that it matters anyway since pre-sale on Taobao always limits to only Chinese, or more accurately anyone with a China bank account as that's what needed to pay for the deposit. International delivery will likely be in November.


----------



## NotKunvinced

I see they're offering the HiBy W3 for $59USD now.


----------



## FinBenton

ClieOS said:


> A bit more official spec on BTR5:
> 
> Qualcomm CSR8675 BT chip
> Dual ESS ES8218P DAC/amp
> ...


Only 9h battery life, even with a bigger battery? Damn, I was hoping to upgrade from btr3 to 5 for more battery life as I get that 9h from btr3 already.


----------



## ClieOS

FinBenton said:


> Only 9h battery life, even with a bigger battery? Damn, I was hoping to upgrade from btr3 to 5 for more battery life as I get that 9h from btr3 already.



Don't forget there are a lot more hardware in the BTR5.


----------



## ClieOS (Oct 2, 2019)

A little more info confirmed on the BTR5 - it will support headset with mic+remote on its 3.5mm socket. That means you can use your existing headphone that already has a mic to receive call, beside the internal mic inside BTR5.


----------



## Sergio88

New images of FiiO BTR5

Source: 
https://m.weibo.cn/search?container...1076031929324574&featurecode=sinanews20170424


----------



## Lohb (Oct 4, 2019)

Does the Hiby *W*5 upscale all source files to UAT ?
I see it has come down in price, but it just does not have the raw power of the new Fiio/Shanling ones coming out..


----------



## Lohb

Make sure to bring the chunky watch and lipstick to the personal audio party...LoL.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> Does the Hiby *W*5 upscale all source files to UAT ?
> I see it has come down in price, but it just does not have the raw power of the new Fiio/Shanling ones coming out..



Unless you absolutely need that much power, then W5 already has more than enough for most headphones. If you however really need that much power, then the question I think is more of an issue on how logical a choice your headphone is rather than the output power the W5.

You can control which BT codec to use in the Hiby app. Normally BT codec, with exception of LHDC (HWA) which will want to stay true to the original music bitrate, will always try to upscale the music to the highest bitrate supported as long as it doesn't reduce performance / transmission quality. W5 will do the same but you can change the setting in the Hiby app to limit what bitrate it is using. Frankly speaking UAT while looking good on paper, is far from practical in real life, if not downright unusable. Doesn't really matters much since UAT is more for using the W5 with Hiby's own DAP and seems to have disable it on their smartphone app.


----------



## ClieOS




----------



## ClieOS

Shanling UP4 gets an early price quote of $85 and pre-order in China starts around November.


----------



## Shanling

ClieOS said:


> Shanling UP4 gets an early price quote of $85 and pre-order in China starts around November.



International price will be 99 USD / Euro and we expect to have them on market in December.


----------



## ClieOS

...just when I thought the pricing is way too competitive. Oh well.


----------



## ClieOS

BTR5's first batch has been shipped in China, 2nd batch / international release will come in mid November.


----------



## Infoseeker

Is there a thread for mmcx and 2pin Bluetooth adapters like the Fostex Tm2, Shure, and Trn B20s, etc.  ...?


----------



## Nolbert0

ClieOS said:


> BTR5's first batch has been shipped in China, 2nd batch / international release will come in mid November.


Looking forward to some reviews and opinions.

But I think I'll wait for the Qudelix... Having said that, I've only got a finite amount of patience so I might end up eating my own words and buy a BTR5 anyways! lol


----------



## Lohb

Nolbert0 said:


> Looking forward to some reviews and opinions.
> 
> But I think I'll wait for the Qudelix... Having said that, I've only got a finite amount of patience so I might end up eating my own words and buy a BTR5 anyways! lol


What did you feel Qudelix has over BTR5 ?


----------



## Lohb

Anyone know of any small transportable wifi direct lossless redbook receivers that can hook into a small DAC along the lines of this Audiophile untethered thread....If its completly off-topic, and anyone knows..please PM me.


----------



## ClieOS

Infoseeker said:


> Is there a thread for mmcx and 2pin Bluetooth adapters like the Fostex Tm2, Shure, and Trn B20s, etc.  ...?



Not to my knowledge. There are too many cable type BT adapter out there and will take an major effort to organize them. 




Nolbert0 said:


> Looking forward to some reviews and opinions.
> 
> But I think I'll wait for the Qudelix... Having said that, I've only got a finite amount of patience so I might end up eating my own words and buy a BTR5 anyways! lol



I should have my BTR5 in 2 weeks or so, hopefully. Very interested in the Qudelix as well, though I reckon it will be awhile before actual release.


----------



## Cevisi (Oct 18, 2019)

Lohb said:


> What did you feel Qudelix has over BTR5 ?


My q5s whit am3d thx modulen suuckkkss compared to my es 100

Ldac eq dont work
It hass background hiss
Filters dont work
Doesent connect automatically to source
Sound is flat some like it i dont like it

My prediction is qudelix will be better then my q5s and when a company cant beat a 100 dollar bluetooth reciever whit his 600 dollar one then why should his 100 dollar one


----------



## fsi22

Cevisi said:


> My q5s whit am3d thx modulen suuckkkss compared to my es 100
> 
> Ldac eq dont work
> It hass background hiss
> ...



Apples and oranges. btr series has been a good bt dac / amp. no connection issues.


----------



## Cevisi

fsi22 said:


> Apples and oranges. btr series has been a good bt dac / amp. no connection issues.


It had no issue after a few updates you mean


----------



## fsi22

Cevisi said:


> It had no issue after a few updates you mean



Btr series has been solid with connection. There will always be someone who has an issue, with any device but that experience does not equal the whole, there have been no auto connection / disconnection problems.


----------



## Cevisi

fsi22 said:


> Btr series has been solid with connection. There will always be someone who has an issue, with any device but that experience does not equal the whole, there have been no auto connection / disconnection problems.


I never said there is a connection problem i saidnit doesent connect automatically to your source after you turn the device on and there is no eq when you using l dac and that is the same on the btr becouse fiio cant cant  write good scripts

At the begining the btr had no eq at all it came whit a patch and it is really bad compared to es 100


----------



## ClieOS

Cevisi said:


> I never said there is a connection problem i saidnit doesent connect automatically to your source after you turn the device on and there is no eq when you using l dac and that is the same on the btr becouse fiio cant cant  write good scripts
> 
> At the begining the btr had no eq at all it came whit a patch and it is really bad compared to es 100



I don't think anyone can argue otherwise that EarStudo has fantastic app. While FiiO might not measure up to EarStudio standard, it is still far better than rest of the crowd (*given Hiby's app really does nothing at this point while Shanling app is stuck in production, and the rest simply has no app at all). 

Remember that ES100 doesn't come with as good an app from the start - it also took them months to work out bugs and add features. You have to also keep in mind that Qudelix uses a brand new Qualcomm chips, so app development will not be as straight forward as FiiO's (which uses the older chips that they have been using for awhile now) and could possibly means more time needed to get the app up to standard, besides the fact that Qudelix capacity as a manufacturer has not been fully tested yet.

One major thing that I think BTR5 has is actually the OLED screen - it allows some settings (filters, gain, balance, etc) to be changed without using an app, which is much more convenient. If FiiO was able to find a way for user to store a few EQ setting on the BTR5 itself, that will be a major sale point.


----------



## Nolbert0 (Oct 18, 2019)

Lohb said:


> What did you feel Qudelix has over BTR5 ?



We'll have to wait for the release of both to find out, won't we?

I think the main reason for me (at this point) is for the possibility of an Early Bird discount from Kickstarter...

Anything technical is going to be a crapshoot, innit? Not until both are released and can be compared in a meaningful way.
At the end of the day, it feels more like choosing between black or red in roulette's at this point.

edit: if you compare the predecessors, ES100 wins over BTR3, no?


----------



## ClieOS

Just found out FiiO has released a beta Android app that is independent of their Music app to control the BTR5. Now that's a big plus in my book.


----------



## DGNZ

ClieOS said:


> Just found out FiiO has released a beta Android app that is independent of their Music app to control the BTR5. Now that's a big plus in my book.


Where can we find this app? I didn't see anything like this on Google Play or any kind of search across the internet.


----------



## ClieOS

DGNZ said:


> Where can we find this app? I didn't see anything like this on Google Play or any kind of search across the internet.



It is still in beta so you can only find it deep inside FiiO website: link


----------



## Infoseeker

ClieOS said:


> Not to my knowledge. There are too many cable type BT adapter out there and will take.



How about Truly Wireless Bluetooth modules. Hopefully someone can get around that.


----------



## ClieOS

Infoseeker said:


> How about Truly Wireless Bluetooth modules. Hopefully someone can get around that.



There are two from TRN (BT20 and BT20s) and one from Fostex (TM2).

I can tell you that those from TRN are pretty good and worth the buy, especially the newer BT20s. Fostex is simply too expensive to make any sense, given it is usually 8x ~ 10x the price of BT20s (especially if you consider TM2 uses almost the same BT chip as BT20s). FiiO is also going to release the UTWS1 by mid ~ end of November, but so far it looks to be very similar to BT20s.


----------



## p50kombi

ClieOS said:


> It is still in beta so you can only find it deep inside FiiO website: link




how the heck did you manage to find that one if you don't mind me asking


----------



## ClieOS

p50kombi said:


> how the heck did you manage to find that one if you don't mind me asking



FiiO posted it in their own forum, in one of the thread regarding BTR5's firmware update.

.Of course it also helps that I read Chinese.


----------



## p50kombi

ClieOS said:


> FiiO posted it in their own forum, in one of the thread regarding BTR5's firmware update.
> 
> .Of course it also helps that I read Chinese.



Haha, yeah, that's probably why I couldn't find it anywhere, not even in the English part of fiio's forum.
If you could please keep an eye on it and update us when they post an update, as I wouldn't know where to look..hehe..
Thanks, my btr5 is in customs atm, looking forward to giving it a spin soon....


----------



## Sergio88

official info from FiiO webpage: https://www.fiio.com/btr5


----------



## episiarch

Sergio88 said:


> official info from FiiO webpage: https://www.fiio.com/btr5



Interesting - balanced output power is up 50% since this post in May – was 160mw per side, now 240.

The one I heard at CanJam London sounded fantastic on my (single-ended) ER4-SR, an earphone that really rewards good driving power.


----------



## vnmslsrbms

p50kombi said:


> Haha, yeah, that's probably why I couldn't find it anywhere, not even in the English part of fiio's forum.
> If you could please keep an eye on it and update us when they post an update, as I wouldn't know where to look..hehe..
> Thanks, my btr5 is in customs atm, looking forward to giving it a spin soon....



What how did you get one?  I checked and it's not available anymore?


----------



## p50kombi

vnmslsrbms said:


> What how did you get one?  I checked and it's not available anymore?


I pre ordered it about 2 months ago.


----------



## Lohb (Oct 24, 2019)

Perfect - kind of excess mWatts headroom I like for planar IEMs and cans for those very short spikes in watts requirements...luckily current generation planars needing way less watts than previous gens...looking gooood....

Anyway, wish they would all roll out small lossless devices this size soon instead of all this recoding of the original redbook FLAC etc...same way you can kick out your lossless to Allo USBridge etc.


----------



## p50kombi

ok, so I just unboxed this little puppy.

First impressions are that it does not seem to work as well as my earstudio es100
I tried the fiio control app and fiio music player and updated to firmware version 1.0.1
However the whichever equaliser setting I choose, it has no effect on the sound in ldac mode or usb mode.
Same when I set it in the menu on the device itself, any changes don't effect sound at all, looks like something is not working properly with the equaliser...
anybody else confirm this?


----------



## tiamor988

p50kombi said:


> ok, so I just unboxed this little puppy.
> 
> First impressions are that it does not seem to work as well as my earstudio es100
> I tried the fiio control app and fiio music player and updated to firmware version 1.0.1
> ...


The EQ wont work with LDAC. Not sure about the USB Mode.


----------



## p50kombi

tiamor988 said:


> The EQ wont work with LDAC. Not sure about the USB Mode.



also not in USB mode, I just checked.
Is this by design or is it a bug?
That's a major drawback for me.


----------



## tiamor988

For USB Mode I'm not sure. For the LDAC, I think it's the design. Even BTR3 EQ cannot set with LDAC. You can search the BTR3 thread about it. Hopefully can be fixed with firmware update.


----------



## ClieOS

p50kombi said:


> ok, so I just unboxed this little puppy.
> 
> First impressions are that it does not seem to work as well as my earstudio es100
> I tried the fiio control app and fiio music player and updated to firmware version 1.0.1
> ...



As I recalled the EQ feature is not actually implemented yet (same for BTR3). You can find the setting tab in the app, but it is a place holder for now until FiiO complete the implementation on future update.


----------



## p50kombi

ClieOS said:


> As I recalled the EQ feature is not actually implemented yet (same for BTR3). You can find the setting tab in the app, but it is a place holder for now until FiiO complete the implementation on future update.



I've just played with it a tad more, it works on all codec up to aptx-hd, anything higher and it won't work.
USB won't work, LDAC won't work.
Hope they fix this soon, that's a major flaw at this point in my eyes.


----------



## Cevisi

p50kombi said:


> ok, so I just unboxed this little puppy.
> 
> First impressions are that it does not seem to work as well as my earstudio es100
> I tried the fiio control app and fiio music player and updated to firmware version 1.0.1
> ...


Thats the same on all fiio products no eq in ldac. Filters also dont work and it does not connect automaticly 

I predictet It. Just wait for qudelix it changed now to the same ess dacs like btr5. And will be a flawless version of the btr5


----------



## ClieOS

Cevisi said:


> I predictet It. Just wait for qudelix it changed now to the same ess dacs like btr5. And will be a flawless version of the btr5



We are at least 2~3 months away from Qudelix 5K, that's assuming everything goes smooth from now. Given how much has changed over the last few weeks on the 5K, I think it is still too early to call it a success.


----------



## Infoseeker (Oct 26, 2019)

I just received the Fostex Tm2, and the adapter works fine. But the the earphones have a wierd industrial new car smell too them. @_@;

The given headphones sound very good in Qualcomm Truly wireless mode. They sound better than the Blon-03 with a bigger soundstage. Similarly  ephathized bass, seperate and not muddled male voices that are just as forward as female voices. High that are there but not painful. Their only downside is they can't handle speedy convulated tracks.




 I was planning to use the Blon-03, but the given drivers also have a better fit.


EDIT: Haha, just my luck my right ear piece mmcx adapter failed, breaking both the Fostex right driver and the adapter.. Now I need to use a 2pin iem and the 2pin adapters to proceed. So now using the Blon-03 and can't use the original Fostex right driver.

Anyone know if there is an english contact for Fostex?


----------



## ClieOS

UP4 gets a firm release date in China: 11.11.


----------



## tsoltan

ClieOS said:


> UP4 gets a firm release date in China: 11.11.


So it means that it would be possible to buy it on ali?


----------



## ClieOS

tsoltan said:


> So it means that it would be possible to buy it on ali?



Likely Shanling is going to sell it within China first, but it is not to say you won't find 3rd party seller putting it on Aliexpress.


----------



## Shanling

tsoltan said:


> So it means that it would be possible to buy it on ali?



No, our dealers on Aliexpress follow schedule for international releases.


----------



## vnmslsrbms

I really hope future versions of these adapters can have wireless charging.  These small electronic devices I think benefit the most from that.  They are small mAh so doesn't take long anyway, and also less chance to break the little door or connector.


----------



## Lohb (Oct 29, 2019)

vnmslsrbms said:


> I really hope future versions of these adapters can have wireless charging.  These small electronic devices I think benefit the most from that.  They are small mAh so doesn't take long anyway, and also less chance to break the little door or connector.


Simple replaceable battery would be great...then you could insert a backup if caught with no power with a sensibly designed insertion/extraction method.


----------



## Infoseeker

Wouldn't a wireless coil be bigger than the device?

Who knows if it would catch radio interference too.


----------



## ClieOS

BTR5 has landed. It really doesn't look that big sitting next to BTR3, but it is on the large side of things for an BT adapter.


----------



## vnmslsrbms

Lohb said:


> Simple replaceable battery would be great...then you could insert a backup if caught with no power with a sensibly designed insertion/extraction method.


Yeah but replaceable battery would make it larger, which is what I don't want.  Also proprietary batteries, chargers etc, ew.  Battery life on these little devices have improved by a ton, and I think will do so even more.  



Infoseeker said:


> Wouldn't a wireless coil be bigger than the device?
> 
> Who knows if it would catch radio interference too.


I have a little sports motion sensor about the size of a quarter and about 3/4 of an inch tall.  It can charge wirelessly.  Also, wouldn't be using it while wirelessly charging so interference is moot unless you think the coil would affect transmission but it doesn't affect cell phones (who knows maybe placed further away).  


ClieOS said:


> BTR5 has landed. It really doesn't look that big sitting next to BTR3, but it is on the large side of things for an BT adapter.


Hope you can turn off the display for better battery life.  Not sure why they made it so it has worse battery life than BTR3 though with more capacity.


----------



## ClieOS

vnmslsrbms said:


> Hope you can turn off the display for better battery life.  Not sure why they made it so it has worse battery life than BTR3 though with more capacity.



The OLED screen auto turn off after a set time (adjustable from 5 to 30 seconds after idle). However, given OLED is the most efficient type of screen, it probably makes little to no difference in battery life, especially compared to how much battery is consumed by the DAC/amp and the SoC chips. The difference in power and control going from BTR3 to BTR5 is vast, to say the least.


----------



## vnmslsrbms

ClieOS said:


> The OLED screen auto turn off after a set time (adjustable from 5 to 30 seconds after idle). However, given OLED is the most efficient type of screen, it probably makes little to no difference in battery life, especially compared to how much battery is consumed by the DAC/amp and the SoC chips. The difference in power and control going from BTR3 to BTR5 is vast, to say the least.


In that case, RIP battery life LOL.


----------



## Cevisi

ClieOS said:


> The OLED screen auto turn off after a set time (adjustable from 5 to 30 seconds after idle). However, given OLED is the most efficient type of screen, it probably makes little to no difference in battery life, especially compared to how much battery is consumed by the DAC/amp and the SoC chips. The difference in power and control going from BTR3 to BTR5 is vast, to say the least.


Does ldac equalizer work


----------



## p50kombi

Cevisi said:


> Does ldac equalizer work



no, ldac and usb equaliser both don't work.
Bit dissapointing, the es100 still has a plus over the btr5 I feel.
Mainly due to the better app and full eq control


----------



## DGNZ

ClieOS said:


> BTR5 has landed.


Well... Tell us the truth. How does it sound? Do you feel any difference (balanced \ unbalanced) comparing to BTR3? And most important - is it worth it?


----------



## Cevisi

p50kombi said:


> no, ldac and usb equaliser both don't work.
> Bit dissapointing, the es100 still has a plus over the btr5 I feel.
> Mainly due to the better app and full eq control


Same on q5s


----------



## ClieOS

DGNZ said:


> Well... Tell us the truth. How does it sound? Do you feel any difference (balanced \ unbalanced) comparing to BTR3? And most important - is it worth it?



I only have a few hours on the BTR5 so far, so this isn't anything set in stone but only an initial observation:

Listening condition (LDAC SQ priority, no EQ and listening to Spotify very high quality)
BTR5 - Apodizing fast roll-off type 1, distortion compensation off, DAC clock divider 1/4, low gain
W5 -  ES9218P, single-ended, stock setting
ES100 - 2X current mode on 3.5mm, 1X voltage on 2.5mm, Short Delay Slow Roll-off, 4X sampling

All listening is done on a pair of DQSM Turandot, stock 2.5mm termination with DD-HiFi's 2.5mm-to-3.5mm adapter.

For 3.5mm single-ended:
W5 has the cleanest and most dynamic sound between the three. Despite BTR5 having the same DAC/amp (single ES9218P on the 3.5mm output), the background on the presentation isn't quite as dark and open as that of W3 - it is subtle but noticeable. Between BTR5 and ES100, I can tell BTR5 offers better control where bass note sound deeper and more impactful, which very well could be a result of having more power. Beyond that, the technical difference the two isn't large enough for me to say one if distinctly better than the other, though I can foresee BTR5 might have the upper hand when it comes to more demanding headphones.

For 2.5mm balanced:
2.5mm is where BTR5 shines. Though not a fair comparison since W5 doesn't have balanced output, I can easily tell that I prefer BTR5's 2.5mm over W5's 3.5mm as BTR3's 2.5mm output is just as clean/dark as W5's 3.5mm while offering better separation that probably a balanced output can deliver. Between BTR5 and ES100's balanced output however, it is less clean cut. On one hand, ES100 sounds more neutral while BTR5 has a very fainted sense of warmth. On the other hand, BTR5 offer noticeable better control over ES100. The difference isn't big enough and I think ultimately it will be down to personal taste to say which one a person will prefer.

Last but not least, while EQ doesn't work on BTR5's LDAC, the various filters, distortion compensation as well as clock divider settings do have fairly noticeable impact over the sound, especially on the texture of the music. These have much bigger impact than what on the ES100. I actually still playing around with different setting and haven't settled on one combination yet. It is actually fun to change things around.


----------



## Lohb (Nov 1, 2019)

What I will be A/B-ing (though a bit unfair) is the BTR5 (lossy) to E1DA9038S "IvanDAC/amp" (lossless hooked in phone) really just to see how close BTR5 can get to it and what the trade off will be going untethered.

Edit : Do you guys run the source at full volume with BT devices since there are 2 volume controls I think....one on source one on BT receiver.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> What I will be A/B-ing (though a bit unfair) is the BTR5 (lossy) to E1DA9038S "IvanDAC/amp" (lossless hooked in phone) really just to see how close BTR5 can get to it and what the trade off will be going untethered.
> 
> Edit : Do you guys run the source at full volume with BT devices since there are 2 volume controls I think....one on source one on BT receiver.



You can also use BTR5 as USB DAC with smartphone as well.

You always want to keep the BT volume on the phone to the max and use the control on the adapter for fine tuning, otherwise you might lose some bitdepth.


----------



## Infoseeker (Nov 6, 2019)

Completely unexpected, but the Trn B20s has less hiss than the Fostex TM2!! B20s is silent, the Fostex has some hiss, but not enough to be interfere...but definitely don't put more sensitive iems on the Fostex.

The Fostex TM2 adds a very tubey decay to iems. But this somehow also separates voices from bass, no bleed at all.

The Trn B20s is more reference tonality-wise. I personally enjoy the Fostex sound with the Blon-03.

But wow, no hiss at all on the Trn B20s and they are more comfortable to wear. The Fostex are comfortable too, just the B20s hugs your ears more. You can definitely work-out with the B20s. No doubt.

The tonality difference is very big between the devices, I am not trying to find something to nickpick about. The Fostex is like using tubes.

Both have a long battery life for a full work day. 9 hours for Trn and 10 hours for the Fostex.

Trn need to be charged individually from a micro USB port on each of them. Comes with a cable with 2 micro outputs.

Fostex comes with a charging cradle. *Cradle*, not a battery container. There is no battery in the cradle.

Should I start a new thread for this?

Trn b20s

   

Fostex TM2


----------



## caprimulgus

Infoseeker said:


> Should I start a new thread for this?



I'm interested in BT cables / attachments - whether it's a separate thread or as part of this one.

Personally, I'm after ones compatible with the proprietary connector on the Sennheiser IE80 (like the new IEN BT neckband that comes with the IE80S BT, and soon to be sold separately), but I'd follow a thread for all similar 2-pin BT adapters!


----------



## ClieOS

BT20s (as well as the previous BT20) is well loved in the TRN thread, no need to start a new thread just for it.


----------



## caprimulgus

ClieOS said:


> BT20s (as well as the previous BT20) is well loved in the TRN thread, no need to start a new thread just for it.



The market for such adapters is broader than TRN though. If discussion of such adapters does not have it's own thread, then I would suggest this thread is a natural place for it (given it is a type of BT adapter)!


----------



## ClieOS

caprimulgus said:


> The market for such adapters is broader than TRN though. If discussion of such adapters does not have it's own thread, then I would suggest this thread is a natural place for it (given it is a type of BT adapter)!



Given there are only 3 models of TWS adapter in the market (TRN BT20, BT20s and Fostex TM2) and TM2 is way overpriced, there is really no much of a point to start a new discussion since the existing thread is more than sufficient to cover the topic where the only focus is on BT20s.

This thread on the other hand is dedicated to hi-res adapter - unless someone is making a hi-res TWS adapter, don't really think it truly belongs here.


----------



## caprimulgus (Nov 7, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> Given there are only 3 models of TWS adapter in the market (TRN BT20, BT20s and Fostex TM2)



Sennheiser IEN BT. (OK, not TWS, per se - but I include neckband style wireless in that market)



> This thread on the other hand is dedicated to hi-res adapter - unless someone is making a hi-res TWS adapter, don't really think it truly belongs here.



Sennheiser IEN BT.


----------



## tiamor988

Hiby W3 just arrived. I've yet to tested all it's feature but so far I'm happy. The UAT works great if you turn off wifi as suggested. Got it together with the short cable.


----------



## ClieOS (Nov 7, 2019)

caprimulgus said:


> Sennheiser IEN BT.



Where is its product page? Google seems to have no idea what it is.

p/s: Found it - it is part of IE80S BT, not a standalone product.


----------



## Lohb

tiamor988 said:


> Hiby W3 just arrived. I've yet to tested all it's feature but so far I'm happy. The UAT works great if you turn off wifi as suggested. Got it together with the short cable.


SQ/battery life ?


----------



## Q Mass

I wish these BT products would adopt 4.4mm sockets.
I know it would increase the size of the device a fraction, but I really hate the tiny little flimsy balanced that are current.
Even though 3.5mm is already quite small and fragile it's still more attractive than 2.5.
I've yet to own 4.4mm devices, but I bet it will feel/last MUCH better than 2.5 (even 3.5).


----------



## Lohb

Q Mass said:


> I wish these BT products would adopt 4.4mm sockets.
> I know it would increase the size of the device a fraction, but I really hate the tiny little flimsy balanced that are current.
> Even though 3.5mm is already quite small and fragile it's still more attractive than 2.5.
> I've yet to own 4.4mm devices, but I bet it will feel/last MUCH better than 2.5 (even 3.5).


Have you had any issues with 2.5" ? I've not been using it long enough to know...


----------



## Infoseeker (Nov 7, 2019)

Lohb said:


> Have you had any issues with 2.5" ? I've not been using it long enough to know...



My personal issue with 2.5 is how jagged and unsmooth an effort it is to insert. I am afraid I will scratch the port or device.

Also, the 2.5 can get unlucky with lint pile up. 

4.4 smoothly fits in with no scratchy feeling.

Probably takes longer for lint to fill up and block things.


----------



## peter123

Lohb said:


> Have you had any issues with 2.5" ? I've not been using it long enough to know...



Fwiw I've never had any issues with the 2.5 mm port on any of my devices.


----------



## ClieOS (Nov 7, 2019)

I too have no issue with any of my 2.5mm port on any of my balanced source, consider that that's the main port I'll use since I always opt for a 2.5mm plug first when buying headphones. 4.4mm plug will indeed be physically more robust, but the socket itself are about >2 times as big as a 3.5mm balanced or >4 times (to even 6 times) as big as a 2.5mm balanced socket. It will not be a particularly wise choice for a small BT adapter to use one - thus the only one using it now is the Oriolus 1795, which is pretty much a full-sized DAC/amp.

The one bad 2.5mm socket I have seen is actually from an AK120, but I think that has more to do with the poor quality control and design on A&K's part, if anything else. I too have seen report of bad 4.4mm socket / plug before, so it is not entirely immune to build quality issue.


----------



## Q Mass

3.5mm balanced would be a step in the right direction, but 2.5mm just _feels_ so janky that it really puts me off.
If I were to (reluctantly) get a BT dac-amp that had 2.5mm balanced, I think I would just use the 3.5mmSE and try to match with 'phones that could be driven adequately SE.
YMMV and it's not a deal breaker for me........but it definitely puts me off.
No other options yet though, for either 3.5mm-balanced, or 4.4mm.


----------



## Nolbert0

3.5mm balanced would be so confusing. 3.5mm already uses the TRRS for mic/remote. How would u differenciate between SE and balanced, then? Balanced is a misnomer. It should really be called dual-mono, but that's a discussion for another day. lol

...How far off topic are going, btw?


----------



## Q Mass

All the devices under discussion are required to have headphone sockets of some description so seems on topic to me, no?

Re' potential confusion, I hadn't considered the requirement for mic/remote function as I'm only really interested in music use, but upon reflection I can see how many consumers of this type of product may desire that functionality.

I assume we're not talking about simple confusion between similarly sized sockets on the same device right? (which would of course be solved by labelling the sockets as is the norm everywhere else).

May I ask, how does 2.5mm manage to deliver mic/remote functions alongside balanced (or dual-mono) sound?

3.5mm balanced aside, I'd happily pay the price of a slightly enlarged device to accommodate a 4.4mm socket, but again, perhaps most folk are content with 2.5 and smaller hardware, and that's why no-one offers 4.4 [shrugs].


----------



## kukkurovaca

Q Mass said:


> All the devices under discussion are required to have headphone sockets of some description so seems on topic to me, no?
> 
> Re' potential confusion, I hadn't considered the requirement for mic/remote function as I'm only really interested in music use, but upon reflection I can see how many consumers of this type of product may desire that functionality.
> 
> ...



Neither 2.5 nor 3.5 balanced cabling supports mic, but with 3.5 balanced it gets confusing because 3.5 balanced isn't as much of a standard as 3.5 TRRS mic cables. I think that's what the previous poster was referring to. I think 4.4 theoretically could include a mic, but I don't think anybody does this yet. 

I think some bluetooth units include a mic on the unit itself, rather than trying to accept mic input from the cable. Same as they do play/pause and track skip controls on the body of the unit.

Re: 4.4, it's not yet as common a standard as 2.5, and was even less common when most of the products now on the market were initially designed. If 4.4 continues to gain ground, I'm sure you'll see bluetooth adapters that feature it in the future. It's pretty well-represented on DAPs, but DAPs are large enough that all three outputs can be included, or supported through swappable amp modules. That's harder on a very small bluetooth adapter -- although it should be possible to make a low-profile 4.4 to 2.5 adapter that would be compact enough that the jack could do double duty without risking unnecessary strain.


----------



## Nolbert0

Q Mass said:


> May I ask, how does 2.5mm manage to deliver mic/remote functions alongside balanced (or dual-mono) sound?


It doesn not.



Q Mass said:


> 3.5mm balanced aside, I'd happily pay the price of a slightly enlarged device to accommodate a 4.4mm socket, but again, perhaps most folk are content with 2.5 and smaller hardware, and that's why no-one offers 4.4 [shrugs].



For such portable use (as a BT receiver), the smaller 2.5mm seems more appropriate to me. I do like the look of the 4.4mm better for general use (e.g. desktop or DAP), tho. The weight and size penalty is more of a consideration when hanging it off a shirt, methinks. I personally haven't broken any 2.5mm connectors thus far so haven't really recognised it as much of an issue. Also, with the forces needed to break a 2.5mm connector, isn't the integrity of the BT reciever itself in equal jeopardy? Just a thought...


----------



## Q Mass

kukkurovaca said:


> Neither 2.5 nor 3.5 balanced cabling supports mic, but with 3.5 balanced it gets confusing because 3.5 balanced isn't as much of a standard as 3.5 TRRS mic cables. I think that's what the previous poster was referring to. I think 4.4 theoretically could include a mic, but I don't think anybody does this yet.
> 
> I think some bluetooth units include a mic on the unit itself, rather than trying to accept mic input from the cable. Same as they do play/pause and track skip controls on the body of the unit.
> 
> Re: 4.4, it's not yet as common a standard as 2.5, and was even less common when most of the products now on the market were initially designed. If 4.4 continues to gain ground, I'm sure you'll see bluetooth adapters that feature it in the future. It's pretty well-represented on DAPs, but DAPs are large enough that all three outputs can be included, or supported through swappable amp modules. That's harder on a very small bluetooth adapter -- although it should be possible to make a low-profile 4.4 to 2.5 adapter that would be compact enough that the jack could do double duty without risking unnecessary strain.


Thanks, I do hope that 4.4 becomes more widespread.

Re' a 2.5 to 4.4 adaptor, do you mean the device would still have a 2.5mm socket?
If so, that wouldn't appeal to me at all, just a nice solid 4.4 into the unit itself please


----------



## kukkurovaca

Q Mass said:


> Thanks, I do hope that 4.4 becomes more widespread.
> 
> Re' a 2.5 to 4.4 adaptor, do you mean the device would still have a 2.5mm socket?
> If so, that wouldn't appeal to me at all, just a nice solid 4.4 into the unit itself please



No, I mean 4.4 is large enough that you could make a very small adapter for it. 2.5 goes into adapter, adapter goes into jack. Same as a compact 3.5mm to 1/4" adapter.


----------



## Q Mass

kukkurovaca said:


> No, I mean 4.4 is large enough that you could make a very small adapter for it. 2.5 goes into adapter, adapter goes into jack. Same as a compact 3.5mm to 1/4" adapter.


AH! Yes, that I would be perfectly in favour of, but I'd just get 4.4mm cables for any of my cans that would take them!


----------



## ClieOS

Nolbert0 said:


> 3.5mm balanced would be so confusing. 3.5mm already uses the TRRS for mic/remote. How would u differenciate between SE and balanced, then? Balanced is a misnomer. It should really be called dual-mono, but that's a discussion for another day. lol





kukkurovaca said:


> Neither 2.5 nor 3.5 balanced cabling supports mic, but with 3.5 balanced it gets confusing because 3.5 balanced isn't as much of a standard as 3.5 TRRS mic cables. I think that's what the previous poster was referring to. I think 4.4 theoretically could include a mic, but I don't think anybody does this yet.
> .



Let address some of the questions:

1) There is another standard that the Chinese proposed, called 3.5Pro - basically the same 3.5mm balanced TRRS, but with an extra piece on the sleeve. The socket is molded in such way that a normal TRRS, i.e.mic cable and stereo TRS will not be able to plug in, but a stepped 3.5mm TRRS can, thus solving the compatibility issue for the most part. A few Chinese DAP makers already start using it. This is by far the best compromise between size and build quality. The only issue is whether anyone outside of China wants to adapt it or not.

2) 4.4mm has 5 pins, 4 have been taken for balanced audio and only one (the ground) is free. For it to support mic, you will need an dedicated mic pin as well - so no, 4.4mm as it is is not compatible with mic. If you want to use 4.4mm for mic, then it can't do balanced audio.


----------



## tiamor988

Lohb said:


> SQ/battery life ?


Will post my impression in a few days. Will not talk about SQ since I have nothing to compare to.


----------



## caprimulgus (Nov 10, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> p/s: Found it - it is part of IE80S BT, not a standalone product.



Sorry mate, but that is incorrect. The IEN BT will be sold as a separate accessory for existing IE8/80(and 800?) owners, hence having its own product code. It is not available yet as a stand-alone product, but Sennheiser (Australia) have told me that it should be available on their website later in the year.

So you accept it in this thread?


----------



## ClieOS

caprimulgus said:


> So you accept it in this thread?



Not for now.


----------



## Raketen (Nov 10, 2019)

ie80s uses proprietary connectors, which makes an ie80 neckband not so useful for anything else. IE800 are hardwired w/ a short 2.5mm cable AFAIK, so a neckband adapter would probably not be ideal, unless Sennheiser make a small 2.5mm  dac amp and a short adapter for ie80? (otherwise an es100 would be perfect for ie800).

I think it makes a great deal of sense to focus this thread on small BT dac/amps w/ stereo jacks. Neckband and true wireless adapters are   specific in use and connectors so should be categorized differently imo.

Like Peter suggested you can always make your own thread if you want to buy a bunch of bt adapters and do the work of comparing them. A lot of people would find that useful.


----------



## caprimulgus (Nov 10, 2019)

Raketen said:


> I think it makes a great deal of sense to focus this thread on small BT dac/amps w/ stereo jacks. Neckband and true wireless adapters are  specific in use and connectors so should be categorized differently imo.



Yep, that is completely fair enough. Sorry for derailing the thread, but it was an innocent (and I believe valid) suggestion that they could be discussed here (or elsewhere), since they ARE high res bluetooth adapters too! But fair enough if you want to focus on the other types of devices, given the more limited / niche use of the neckband style adapters.

(There is absolutely no need to be rude about it, though!)


----------



## ClieOS

Shanling UP4 vs. FiiO BTR5


----------



## Infoseeker (Nov 20, 2019)

I like that they have nfc pads. That will be convenient. Don't forget to leave a point of reference, like a complete pencil or an eraser.


----------



## Q Mass

ClieOS said:


> Shanling UP4 vs. FiiO BTR5


OOOOOOH! Even MORE interesting .
This is exactly the comparison I'm most interested in .
I'm hoping to eventually get one of these (seems like the Qudelix is still a long way off), and the Shouer Tapes.

Definitely looking forward to hearing your thoughts re' these.


----------



## Infoseeker

I cam tell you the Shuoer Tape's can be run off the Trn B20s without any hiss.


----------



## Lohb

ClieOS said:


> Shanling UP4 vs. FiiO BTR5


Did you receive these units to A/B, or was that just a photo from elsewhere ?


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> Did you receive these units to A/B, or was that just a photo from elsewhere ?



No one sends any of these to me for review, and I am just collecting them because I have been into BT wireless audio for awhile now. A/Bing is not really the goal, but part of the process when listening and evaluating them for my own enjoyment - so no, that's not a photo from elsewhere as I took that photo myself.


----------



## SoundMuppet

I was almost set on buying a BTR5 now that it's shipping to my country but now I'm hesitating. The main reason BTR5 was the choice is because I'm going to use it as an USB DAC 50% of the time and it supported 24-bit/192kHz while UP4 "only" supported 16bit/48kHz. I've now learned that during playback there isn't any need for anything higher than 16bit/48kHz (If I'm wrong, please correct me) and since UP4 also have longer battery time, it just seems like a better buy. Will you be able to order UP4 from somewhere in Europe?


----------



## ClieOS

SoundMuppet said:


> I was almost set on buying a BTR5 now that it's shipping to my country but now I'm hesitating. The main reason BTR5 was the choice is because I'm going to use it as an USB DAC 50% of the time and it supported 24-bit/192kHz while UP4 "only" supported 16bit/48kHz. I've now learned that during playback there isn't any need for anything higher than 16bit/48kHz (If I'm wrong, please correct me) and since UP4 also have longer battery time, it just seems like a better buy. Will you be able to order UP4 from somewhere in Europe?



You don't need anything higher than 16/48 if that's the native sampling rate of all your music. But it you have Hi-res music (i.e. 24bits PCM or DSD, etc), then you want to keep it to its native sampling rate as much as possible as software downsampling is.usually not good for SQ. Also, battery life won't really matter in USB DAC mode since your PC's USB port will be constantly charging the device, so the more practical concern should be - will you ever going to need to listening to music for 7~8 hrs straight and more on battery? Remember that a better buy is not what better on paper, but more practical in use.


----------



## SoundMuppet

ClieOS said:


> You don't need anything higher than 16/48 if that's the native sampling rate of all your music. But it you have Hi-res music (i.e. 24bits PCM or DSD, etc), then you want to keep it to its native sampling rate as much as possible as software downsampling is.usually not good for SQ. Also, battery life won't really matter in USB DAC mode since your PC's USB port will be constantly charging the device, so the more practical concern should be - will you ever going to need to listening to music for 7~8 hrs straight and more on battery? Remember that a better buy is not what better on paper, but more practical in use.


Thank you for the good points. I see you own both BTR5 and UP4, have you formed an opinion on how they compare to each other and who you like best? Or is it still too early?


----------



## ClieOS

SoundMuppet said:


> Thank you for the good points. I see you own both BTR5 and UP4, have you formed an opinion on how they compare to each other and who you like best? Or is it still too early?



Will post a comparison in next few days.


----------



## Lohb

ClieOS said:


> No one sends any of these to me for review, and I am just collecting them because I have been into BT wireless audio for awhile now. A/Bing is not really the goal, but part of the process when listening and evaluating them for my own enjoyment - so no, that's not a photo from elsewhere as I took that photo myself.


Yes, I did not mean were they freebies for reviews..but just did you have them both. Looking forward to impressions. It's been a long wait for these units to release, or so it feels.


----------



## ClieOS

Impression updated with BTR5 and UP4 - please read the 2nd post for detail.


----------



## Hisma

ClieOS said:


> Impression updated with BTR5 and UP4 - please read the 2nd post for detail.


damn dude those UP4 results .  Now I regret buying one over the BTR5.  Shanling must answer to this.


----------



## Lohb (Dec 2, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> Impression updated with BTR5 and UP4 - please read the 2nd post for detail.


Thanks...BTR5 winning on balanced SQ output vs UP4...good to know, from trusted ears.

Guess you will update this in some way, as I know its so soon since adding 2 more dongles.

"*Sum-up*
Out of the five, W5 probably has the best SQ"


----------



## Shanling

ClieOS said:


> Impression updated with BTR5 and UP4 - please read the 2nd post for detail.





Hisma said:


> damn dude those UP4 results .  Now I regret buying one over the BTR5.  Shanling must answer to this.



Consulting with our engineers now.

If I get it correct, measurements are done over USB only, but you noticed the problem by your hearing when using Bluetooth also? @ClieOS


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> ...
> "*Sum-up*
> Out of the five, W5 probably has the best SQ"



Corrected



Shanling said:


> If I get it correct, measurements are done over USB only, but you noticed the problem by your hearing when using Bluetooth also? @ClieOS



Yes, USB DAC only. I decided to do the test because it doesn't sound coherent on BT in the first place. Will try to do more test over BT tonight and see if there is any difference.


----------



## Lohb

Anyone know if BTR5 best price is on aliX ?


----------



## ClieOS

Retested UP4 a couple of times, both as USB DAC and on BT (via Creative BT-D1, aptX codec)

Good news first - after some reconfiguration of the testing equipment, I rerun the USB DAC test multiple times and UP4 result shows overall improvement - there are still noticeable distortion, but significantly less so from the yesterday's test. Not really sure what causes the difference in result for UP4, as BTR5 under the same test only shows marginal difference. See ND file in zip for detail

Somewhat of a bad news - as expected, BT test's result is worst than USB DAC test due to the fact the aptX is used, as opposed to hard wire (*applicable to both UP4 and BTR5), but the significant bit is that multiple test run on UP4 all came out with slightly different result, implicating inconsistency on performance (on contrast, BTR5's BT test is fairly consistent). Noticeably FR curve seems to be mismatched every time, among other things. See aptX files in zip for detail.

Updated RMAA zip file is on 2nd post.

So this isn't exactly all positive across the board, but I'll revise my advice for UP4 from 'not recommended' to 'caution when buying'.


----------



## Q Mass

A question to owners of any of the newer BT dac/amps which handle LDAC or any other of the recent 'hi-rez' codecs:

Which wired DAP (that you have heard) most closely matches your BT device in terms of quality (not so much _character_, just overall SQ)?

I ask on behalf of all those (me too) who haven't heard a modern BT device, and are wondering what general level of SQ modern Bluetooth can achieve compared to wired.

I realise that results will vary wildly due to differing headphone performance, but knowing which tier of performance a device like a UP4 or BTR5 enjoys would help many of us out a lot.

Thanks Folks!


----------



## vnmslsrbms

Q Mass said:


> A question to owners of any of the newer BT dac/amps which handle LDAC or any other of the recent 'hi-rez' codecs:
> 
> Which wired DAP (that you have heard) most closely matches your BT device in terms of quality (not so much _character_, just overall SQ)?
> 
> ...



SQ compared to anything wired, you are going to hear a little degradation.  APTXHD or LDAC is pretty decent though.  I think in an outside environment, you are going to be satisfied, since the reduction of cord tangle (not to mention the outside noise, your own footsteps, etc) kind of makes the difference moot IMO.  There's no reason for me to use bluetooth at home, except for sometimes playing music from my iPad, and that's just for convenience sake in my bedroom.  Or in the shower.  BT has come a long ways I think.  However finding devices that support the codecs that you want with all the functionality (form factor) that you want isn't always straightforward.  It's certainly moving in the right direction though, and is something that is probably one of the most rapidly changing audio spaces.  

It's also not often straightforward what your device is using, and how to set it or force it.  So, your mileage may vary, but generally it's very decent experience, although to me, when hooking up the say BTR5 compared to Shure BMCE2, to the completely wireless options, you are making sacrifices in SQ, power, and customisability within the Bluetooth realm (more convenient, less of everything).  One day in the future the completely wireless buds will sound just as good as a wired connection, but that's still a ways away (cost/battery problems mostly limiting the power output decision).


----------



## Q Mass

vnmslsrbms said:


> SQ compared to anything wired, you are going to hear a little degradation.  APTXHD or LDAC is pretty decent though.  I think in an outside environment, you are going to be satisfied, since the reduction of cord tangle (not to mention the outside noise, your own footsteps, etc) kind of makes the difference moot IMO.  There's no reason for me to use bluetooth at home, except for sometimes playing music from my iPad, and that's just for convenience sake in my bedroom.  Or in the shower.  BT has come a long ways I think.  However finding devices that support the codecs that you want with all the functionality (form factor) that you want isn't always straightforward.  It's certainly moving in the right direction though, and is something that is probably one of the most rapidly changing audio spaces.
> 
> It's also not often straightforward what your device is using, and how to set it or force it.  So, your mileage may vary, but generally it's very decent experience, although to me, when hooking up the say BTR5 compared to Shure BMCE2, to the completely wireless options, you are making sacrifices in SQ, power, and customisability within the Bluetooth realm (more convenient, less of everything).  One day in the future the completely wireless buds will sound just as good as a wired connection, but that's still a ways away (cost/battery problems mostly limiting the power output decision).


Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.

You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).

If so that's kinda disappointing, as I was hoping to use my phone (Sony, LDAC) as a transport/host for Spotify offline (and maybe Tidal offline) via BTR5 or similar, without it being a step down from entry level, (or even perhaps some mid-range) DAP's.

To be clear, my question is only in reference to sound quality, not other attributes.


----------



## peter123

Q Mass said:


> Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.
> 
> You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
> Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).
> ...



Fwiw my experience is quite different. To my ears the Radsone ES100 does outperform the Shanling M1 ($99) in performance over Bluetooth through its balanced output (single ended I'd put it on a similar level). I do also use it with Bluetooth both at home and in the office and I'm perfectly happy with it although I have a quite large amount of wired options that I could choose in those places.

I haven't bought any other DAPs since I got the ES100 since I'm perfectly happy with it.


----------



## vnmslsrbms

Q Mass said:


> Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.
> 
> You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
> Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).
> ...


Honestly there is such a wide range of DAPs it's hard to say.  I was thinking more similar range.  Like say if you took the best DAP vs the best Bluetooth option, the best DAP would beat it for sure.  Taking the cheapest of anything would result in crap as well.  If you chose the cheap DAP vs the cheap BT (which I have tried) it would just be a competition for futility.  Honestly I don't think you would be disappointed too much in the ES100.  The new BTR5 would be fun to try out as well.  Try them and compare to your DAP.  Again, using BT isn't to beat the DAP, since it offers convenience benefits.  If you're looking for best SQ possible then obviously wired.  If you want to spend not too much money then ES100 would work great with your smart phone or DAP.


----------



## Q Mass

peter123 said:


> Fwiw my experience is quite different. To my ears the Radsone ES100 does outperform the Shanling M1 ($99) in performance over Bluetooth through its balanced output (single ended I'd put it on a similar level). I do also use it with Bluetooth both at home and in the office and I'm perfectly happy with it although I have a quite large amount of wired options that I could choose in those places.
> 
> I haven't bought any other DAPs since I got the ES100 since I'm perfectly happy with it.


Thanks,  this at least gives me a very rough idea of where you think the best BT devices lie in sound quality (unavoidably, value plays a part here too, but comparison to the M1 does at least give someone who hasn't heard the newest BT a ballpark idea of where the tech is currently at).
I have read that the M1 is no slouch for it's price, so that would elevate the contemporary BT experience above my own limited (and unsatisfactory)  BT experience with old kit.

BT may yet prove to be disappointing SQ wise, but if it can compete with the M1 it might be worth a try .





vnmslsrbms said:


> Honestly there is such a wide range of DAPs it's hard to say.  I was thinking more similar range.  Like say if you took the best DAP vs the best Bluetooth option, the best DAP would beat it for sure.  Taking the cheapest of anything would result in crap as well.  If you chose the cheap DAP vs the cheap BT (which I have tried) it would just be a competition for futility.  Honestly I don't think you would be disappointed too much in the ES100.  The new BTR5 would be fun to try out as well.  Try them and compare to your DAP.  Again, using BT isn't to beat the DAP, since it offers convenience benefits.  If you're looking for best SQ possible then obviously wired.  If you want to spend not too much money then ES100 would work great with your smart phone or DAP.


OK, thanks again.
Do you have any cheapish DAP's which compares in SQ to your es100?
I'm not expecting even the best BT solutions to compare to the best wired, I'm just trying to get a rough idea where the best BT lies in the spectrum before I make the decision to invest (maybe gamble would be a better word here!).


----------



## monsieurfromag3 (Dec 4, 2019)

Q Mass said:


> Many thanks for the comprehensive reply.
> 
> You really don't think something like the BTR5 can go 'toe to toe' (sonically) with even the entry level daps from say FIIO, Hiby or Sony?
> Maybe I'm misinterpreting your first sentence, but it seems like (current) BT devices will all offer a compromised sound compared to even cheap wired DAP's (?).
> ...


I’m going to do just that in a few months’ time, letting my precious V30 go and get one of those new jack-less phones (or might as well be jack-less given how lackluster they sound when they maintain the legacy jack).
The V30 is easily at the level of current $300 Pioneer or Fiio DAPs.
I also have an ES100, the format is invaluable in the summer. I tend to reach for my V30, for better dynamics and resolution. But that’s also down to the ES100’s softer tuning.

The newest generation of BT receivers (Qudelix 5K, Fiio BTR5, Shanling up4...) boast similar specs to the newest generation of entry-level DAPs, or the previous generation of mid-level DAPs. AptX HD or LDAC transmission means you are not losing out on anything meaningful if you stream up to CD quality, as you can see from the curves here. I was going to get a DAP and use it as BT receiver but I don’t think I’ll bother, as SQ now reaches neck-and-neck.

I’ll ping the excellent @holsen here as he had interesting things to write on the subject on the Shanling up thread.


----------



## Hanesu

I have compared my iFi xDSD in bluetooth mode to several mid priced DAPS - and I honestly though it`s not such a big difference in SQ. It`s amost the same as the difference between DAPs themselves. They all have a slightly different sound - but it is very difficult to say which is better or worse because it`s all so subjective. 
So I would be very interested, too, if somebody could compare BTR5 to a DAP.


----------



## Q Mass

monsieurfromag3 said:


> I’m going to do just that in a few months’ time, letting my precious V30 go and get one of those new jack-less phones (or might as well be jack-less given how lackluster they sound when they maintain the legacy jack).
> The V30 is easily at the level of current $300 Pioneer or Fiio DAPs.
> I also have an ES100, the format is invaluable in the summer. I tend to reach for my V30, for better dynamics and resolution. But that’s also down to the ES100’s softer tuning.
> 
> ...


That's encouraging! 
At the price point, I think that current entry level DAP, or last gen' mid level is pretty damn good for a wireless solution.
The FIIO Q5S is also interesting, but for me, too big.
If I were prepared to go to that size I'd just get/use a wired DAP (the price is also uncomfortably high, and too close to the M11 et-al, for me at least, same for the Ifi xdsd ).

it sounds as though I might not lose out on too much SQ compared to most entry level DAP's, and maybe even some of the mid level ones?


----------



## Q Mass

BTW, does it surprise anyone else that Sony don't seem to have a dog in this particular race?
I mean, LDAC is their codec after all!

Maybe they're too focused on their wireless headphones and 'true wireless' to consider a BT dac-amp?

(apologies for the BtoB)


----------



## ClieOS (Dec 4, 2019)

Q Mass said:


> BTW, does it surprise anyone else that Sony don't seem to have a dog in this particular race?
> I mean, LDAC is their codec after all!
> 
> Maybe they're too focused on their wireless headphones and 'true wireless' to consider a BT dac-amp?
> ...



To somewhat answer your question, as I have some insight from a friend who used to hold a fairly high position in the company - Sony, as a huge international organization as well as having a very Japanese style management system, is very compartmentalized in its various individual business sector. That means there is a headphone department, a DAP department (probably resides within their higher-end AV department) as well as a smartphone department (which will oversee all the BT adapter R&D), and they usually don't talk to each other. A good evidence is that - despite supplying most of the CMOS camera modules to most brands of smartphone and known for having exceptional image quality, Sony's own smartphone, which uses its own CMOS sensor, are known to suck - the company smartphone department actually goes as far last year as to publicly admits the reason is that because they can't get enough resource from the camera department in order to optimize the smartphone software (where the same camera is supplied to the competitors and is much better utilized). That will tell you just how bad Sony as a company is when it comes to communication within the company. Each department has its own yearly financial report and the performance of a particular department is often not a concern for the head of another department.


----------



## Q Mass

ClieOS said:


> To somewhat answer your question, as I have some insight from a friend who used to hold a fairly high position in the company - Sony, as a huge international organization as well as having a very Japanese style management system, is very compartmentalized in its various individual business sector. That means there is a headphone department, a DAP department (probably resides within their higher-end AV department) as well as a smartphone department (which will oversee all the BT adapter R&D), and they usually don't talk to each other. A good evidence is that - despite supplying most of the CMOS camera modules to most brands of smartphone and known for having exceptional image quality, Sony's own smartphone, which uses its own CMOS sensor, are known to suck - the company smartphone department actually goes as far last year as to publicly admits the reason is that because they can't get enough resource from the camera department in order to optimize the smartphone software (where the same camera is supplied to the competitors and is much better utilized). That will tell you just how bad Sony as a company is when it comes to communication within the company. Each department has its own yearly financial report and the performance of a particular department is often not a concern for the head of another department.


That's messed up.
Or maybe it isn't, maybe Sony wouldn't be Sony if they worked differently?
Either way, it's a shame they don't make a BT dac-amp, as I bet they'd make a great one.
They make pretty damn good small DAP's, they've got some cool small amp tech', and stellar battery life.
Plenty of experience with Bluetooth too!


----------



## monsieurfromag3 (Dec 4, 2019)

Q Mass said:


> That's encouraging!
> At the price point, I think that current entry level DAP, or last gen' mid level is pretty damn good for a wireless solution.
> The FIIO Q5S is also interesting, but for me, too big.
> If I were prepared to go to that size I'd just get/use a wired DAP (the price is also uncomfortably high, and too close to the M11 et-al, for me at least, same for the Ifi xdsd ).
> ...


I’m with you on the Q5S and xDSD. I’ve never heard the Fiio but have briefly tried the xDSD, and it went as it always does whenever I audition iFi’s products - on paper they’re perfect and I’m terribly excited, but in person I find them clangy, non-musical, and fussy to use. That’s just me though and technically they’re up there, definitely worth the price. But if that format was okay I would rather get a DAP that also receives LDAC.

Regarding Sony, @ClieOS ‘s insight is enlightening; I find it crazy that their new Android DAPs are the only ones in that throng of competitors to NOT work as USB DACs, which all of these tiny dongles do!
Edit: their WM line of DAPs have been updated with the BT receiver function I believe.


----------



## kangdaniel (Dec 5, 2019)

Hi @ClieOS , how about Fiio M5 (bluetooth receiver mode) vs ES100, BTR5? Although W5 has the best SQ, I don't like carrying its case.


----------



## twice2

ClieOS, I am interested if you prefer some settings in the ES100 app? I can hear some difference when changing the roll off settings. I turned off all the digital enhancements like Jitter Detection and DCT.


----------



## Hanesu

monsieurfromag3 said:


> I’m with you on the Q5S and xDSD. I’ve never heard the Fiio but have briefly tried the xDSD, and it went as it always does whenever I audition iFi’s products - on paper they’re perfect and I’m terribly excited, but in person I find them clangy, non-musical, and fussy to use. That’s just me though and technically they’re up there, definitely worth the price. But if that format was okay I would rather get a DAP that also receives LDAC.
> 
> Regarding Sony, @ClieOS ‘s insight is enlightening; I find it crazy that their new Android DAPs are the only ones in that throng of competitors to NOT work as USB DACs, which all of these tiny dongles do!
> Edit: their WM line of DAPs have been updated with the BT receiver function I believe.



Well, my personal experience is, since I bought the XDSD, I did not use my DAP anymore (and finally sold it). The big advantage of a bluetooth device compared to a DAP is, that you can permanently keep it in your pocket and flexibly connect it to all different types of devices that you use. For example, if I am on the train, I connect it to my phone (which has a smoother UI than almost any DAP), when I work to my  computer (and can browse through my music on a big screen) and in the evening I can watch a movie with it on my TV. You cannot do this with most DAPs unless it has bluetooth receiver mode. The Fiio M11 has, but is way bigger and bulkier than the XDSD. And once you got used to BT streaming from any device, you don`t need the stand allone DAP feature anymore.
Me, personally, I feel something like the XDSD is a great solution. SQ is very close to DAPs and a bit better than dongles like ES100. But still it`s smaller than most DAPs and does not need an extra screen/UI.


----------



## ClieOS (Dec 5, 2019)

twice2 said:


> ClieOS, I am interested if you prefer some settings in the ES100 app? I can hear some difference when changing the roll off settings. I turned off all the digital enhancements like Jitter Detection and DCT.



Current setting: 1x voltage 2.5mm output, HD Jitter Cleaner on, no EQ, no crossfeed, DCT 5, Short Delay Slow Roll-off, 4x over-sampling.


----------



## holsen

monsieurfromag3 said:


> I’m going to do just that in a few months’ time, letting my precious V30 go and get one of those new jack-less phones (or might as well be jack-less given how lackluster they sound when they maintain the legacy jack).
> The V30 is easily at the level of current $300 Pioneer or Fiio DAPs.
> I also have an ES100, the format is invaluable in the summer. I tend to reach for my V30, for better dynamics and resolution. But that’s also down to the ES100’s softer tuning.
> 
> ...


Merci @monsieurfromag3   I dont have the BTR5 or the new UP4 but I've got an AK120, Shanling M5s, UP2 and BTR3.   Here's the thing.  The minute you go Bluetooth, by its very nature, your going to get compression and theoretical degradation of SQ, but here's the other the thing: do you actually hear the difference?

Ive got several high end IEMS with several more on the way (3 new IEMS just got shipped i the last 24 hours )  and I love each of my IEMS with the Bluetooth Receivers.   I like the BTR3 but I LOVE the UP2.   It's clean, detailed, pitch black and where the BTR3 sounds a bit congested, the UP2 is far more open and spacious.  I'm sure some people will throw rocks or shoot arrows for what I'm about to say but for the pure convenience of it and the resultant SQ that comes with 990 Bitrate of LDAC, provided you've got good IEMS that you're happy with and a device that can broadcast LDAC, I'd put a (good) BT receiver against an entry level or even a lower mid tier DAP any day of the week.   You get incredible battery life, unparalleled wireless freedom, your choice of earbus or cans and stellar SQ.   I think I'd never buy TWS earphones.  I'd take a BT receiver handsdown over wireless earbuds too.  Now dont get me wrong.  I still prefer a wired connection in many environments.   In an airplane, plugged into my car audio system or just casual listening but because of the convenience and for I what I perceive to be a very limited compromise, I actually find myself going wireless more oft than not as of late.

Hope this is helpful in someway.  Funny enough, I just posted this ovr on the IMR RAH thread an hour ago: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/imr-rah-discussion-impressions-thread.914601/page-19#post-15345709


----------



## monsieurfromag3

holsen said:


> Merci @monsieurfromag3   I dont have the BTR5 or the new UP4 but I've got an AK120, Shanling M5s, UP2 and BTR3.   Here's the thing.  The minute you go Bluetooth, by its very nature, your going to get compression and theoretical degradation of SQ, but here's the other the thing: do you actually hear the difference?
> 
> Ive got several high end IEMS with several more on the way (3 new IEMS just got shipped i the last 24 hours )  and I love each of my IEMS with the Bluetooth Receivers.   I like the BTR3 but I LOVE the UP2.   It's clean, detailed, pitch black and where the BTR3 sounds a bit congested, the UP2 is far more open and spacious.  I'm sure some people will throw rocks or shoot arrows for what I'm about to say but for the pure convenience of it and the resultant SQ that comes with 990 Bitrate of LDAC, provided you've got good IEMS that you're happy with and a device that can broadcast LDAC, I'd put a (good) BT receiver against an entry level or even a lower mid tier DAP any day of the week.   You get incredible battery life, unparalleled wireless freedom, your choice of earbus or cans and stellar SQ.   I think I'd never buy TWS earphones.  I'd take a BT receiver handsdown over wireless earbuds too.  Now dont get me wrong.  I still prefer a wired connection in many environments.   In an airplane, plugged into my car audio system or just casual listening but because of the convenience and for I what I perceive to be a very limited compromise, I actually find myself going wireless more oft than not as of late.
> 
> Hope this is helpful in someway.  Funny enough, I just posted this ovr on the IMR RAH thread an hour ago: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/imr-rah-discussion-impressions-thread.914601/page-19#post-15345709


Yes! I saw your post over on the Rah thread and for a second I thought you'd mistakenly replied to my message on the wrong board 

I incline towards the same sentiment, I am a big wireless believer but won’t cut too many corners on SQ, so receivers seem like the best compromise nowadays. Most integrated solutions, like true wireless iems or even full-sized BT cans, still can’t match receivers + great wired gear for the most part. My Aëdle VK-X are an exception, but they’re also broken and the company went under, so... not too many options.


----------



## pashhtk27

Just an opinion, but won't DAPs like Shanling M0 and Hidizs AP80 be a better choice over pure bluetooth receivers as they can act like one and are also small enough to clip and use. And when you don't have your smartphone, you can always use them as discrete source. Unfortunately they only support LDAC and no APTX-HD or APTX-LL but maybe future iterations or alternatives with Qualcomm chipsets will.


----------



## ClieOS

pashhtk27 said:


> Just an opinion, but won't DAPs like Shanling M0 and Hidizs AP80 be a better choice over pure bluetooth receivers as they can act like one and are also small enough to clip and use. And when you don't have your smartphone, you can always use them as discrete source. Unfortunately they only support LDAC and no APTX-HD or APTX-LL but maybe future iterations or alternatives with Qualcomm chipsets will.



Without the ability to take call, Shanling M0 and Hidizs AP80 can, at most, act as a Bluetooth DAC/amp but not a Bluetooth adapter. We are not here to look for small DAC/amp or DAP with Bluetooth receiving capability, but an wireless extension of smartphone that provide better SQ so we can better enjoy our music on-the-go and taking call without having to take out our smartphone every time it rings.


----------



## DanWiggins

ClieOS said:


> Without the ability to take call, Shanling M0 and Hidizs AP80 can, at most, act as a Bluetooth DAC/amp but not a Bluetooth adapter. We are not here to look for small DAC/amp or DAP with Bluetooth receiving capability, but an wireless extension of smartphone that provide better SQ so we can better enjoy our music on-the-go and taking call without having to take out our smartphone every time it rings.


Wait, you can take a _phone call on your cellphone_?  Is there an app for that?  I thought they were just for texting/WeChat/Line, Snapchat/Instagram, Facebook/Twitter, etc...


----------



## max232

CKS0923 said:


> I have been searching for a pair of BT headphones that sounds like my NAD HP-50. I had my mind set on the HP-70s but keep reading that they can sound edgy at times, which hasn't been the case for the HP-50. Then one day I came across an article introducing a BT receiver and later found this thread. This could have been the perfect solution for my need! Converting the HP-50 to wireless! One question I have is, how does these (< $150 ones) generally sound when compared to, say headphones wired to a Sansa Clip+?


I use the es100 with my Nad HP-50 using a short cable with right angle plugs. The es100 clips onto the metal portion of the Nad headband. Works great.


----------



## pashhtk27

ClieOS said:


> Without the ability to take call, Shanling M0 and Hidizs AP80 can, at most, act as a Bluetooth DAC/amp but not a Bluetooth adapter. We are not here to look for small DAC/amp or DAP with Bluetooth receiving capability, but an wireless extension of smartphone that provide better SQ so we can better enjoy our music on-the-go and taking call without having to take out our smartphone every time it rings.



I've always been the phone speaker guy, It didn't even occur to me that headphones can be used that way!


----------



## Q Mass

pashhtk27 said:


> Just an opinion, but won't DAPs like Shanling M0 and Hidizs AP80 be a better choice over pure bluetooth receivers as they can act like one and are also small enough to clip and use. And when you don't have your smartphone, you can always use them as discrete source. Unfortunately they only support LDAC and no APTX-HD or APTX-LL but maybe future iterations or alternatives with Qualcomm chipsets will.


I got very excited about the Hidizs AP80 PRO,  until I realised that it doesn't support Spotify (or Tidal) offline.
There are several other small DAP's that I got excited about recently, but none of them allow streaming service offline playlists (If you see what I mean).
The new Hiby pro was particularly interesting as it looked like it might work as a completely independent 'high rez' capable DAP that could be remotely controlled by a smartphone via Hiby-link, but as far as I know that can't be used to control Tidal or Spotify, and the DAP doesn't allow offline playlists anyway.

So it looks like something like the BTR5, UP4 or eventually Qudelix will be my best solution.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Q Mass said:


> I got very excited about the Hidizs AP80 PRO,  until I realised that it doesn't support Spotify (or Tidal) offline.
> There are several other small DAP's that I got excited about recently, but none of them allow streaming service offline playlists (If you see what I mean).
> The new Hiby pro was particularly interesting as it looked like it might work as a completely independent 'high rez' capable DAP that could be remotely controlled by a smartphone via Hiby-link, but as far as I know that can't be used to control Tidal or Spotify, and the DAP doesn't allow offline playlists anyway.
> 
> So it looks like something like the BTR5, UP4 or eventually Qudelix will be my best solution.


Doesn’t Hiby Link just transmit whatever is playing on your phone to these DAPs though? So you’d just control all of the playback from your phone, including streaming apps?


----------



## Q Mass

monsieurfromag3 said:


> Doesn’t Hiby Link just transmit whatever is playing on your phone to these DAPs though? So you’d just control all of the playback from your phone, including streaming apps?


I could easily be wrong, but I thought Hibylink just offered *control* of a remote device, rather than actual transmission of audio data like Bluetooth.
This means that whatever device you have your 'phones plugged into has to support whatever music files you want to listen to (I'm not even certain Hibylink can be used with *any* other playing software than Hiby Music).

Can anyone here clarify?

'cos if Hibylink *can* be used to transmit Spotify or Tidal stuff from my phone then I'll definitely be rethinking and taking another look at Hiby players!


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Q Mass said:


> I could easily be wrong, but I thought Hibylink just offered *control* of a remote device, rather than actual transmission of audio data like Bluetooth.
> This means that whatever device you have your 'phones plugged into has to support whatever music files you want to listen to (I'm not even certain Hibylink can be used with *any* other playing software than Hiby Music).
> 
> Can anyone here clarify?
> ...


I want to know this too!


----------



## ClieOS (Dec 8, 2019)

monsieurfromag3 said:


> Doesn’t Hiby Link just transmit whatever is playing on your phone to these DAPs though? So you’d just control all of the playback from your phone, including streaming apps?





Q Mass said:


> I could easily be wrong, but I thought Hibylink just offered *control* of a remote device, rather than actual transmission of audio data like Bluetooth.
> This means that whatever device you have your 'phones plugged into has to support whatever music files you want to listen to (I'm not even certain Hibylink can be used with *any* other playing software than Hiby Music).
> 
> Can anyone here clarify?
> ...



Dunno  how Hiby Link works on Hiby DAPs, but it mere offers very limited control for W5, more like just displaying status for codec and such. On older version, I used to be able to force my W5 into different codec, i.e. UAT (that means Spotify can stream in UAT), but that was removed from later update. Now to use UAT, I have to use Hiby music app.. All and all, the app itself is fairly pointless to me.


----------



## Q Mass

ClieOS said:


> Dunno  how Hiby Link works on Hiby DAPs, but it mere offers very limited control for W5, more like just displaying status for codec and such. On older version, I used to be able to force my W5 into different codec, i.e. UAT (that means Spotify can stream in UAT), but that was removed from later update. Now to use UAT, I have to use Hiby music app.. All and all, the app itself is fairly pointless to me.


It sounds as though the app is even more useless than I feared


----------



## ClieOS

Battery test added, so far BTR3, BTR5 and ES100 have been tested. See 2nd post for detail.


----------



## nitinvaid20

Right now i have no DAC Just my OnePlus 7pro with stock USB C to 3.5mm converter and now my 1more quad driver does not sound good as it was used to be...
O was thinking to get BTR3 please suggest will it improves? My sound quality


----------



## holsen

nitinvaid20 said:


> Right now i have no DAC Just my OnePlus 7pro with stock USB C to 3.5mm converter and now my 1more quad driver does not sound good as it was used to be...
> O was thinking to get BTR3 please suggest will it improves? My sound quality


I would say resoundingly Yes.  Even though your connection will be over Bluetooth, you'll hear marked improvent in detail and depth of sound, provided your phone can broadcast LDAC.  If your considering the BTR3 I'd encourage you to look at the UP2.  I have both and much prefer the UP2.


----------



## ClieOS

UP2 battery life added.


----------



## Lohb

Sooo slow for BTR5 to come out...think it was end of September or something at some point.
Will be wearing a hearing aid by the time its in my hands.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> Sooo slow for BTR5 to come out...think it was end of September or something at some point.
> Will be wearing a hearing aid by the time its in my hands.



Late October, actually. mine was part of the very first batch. Second batch as well as all the international order (which goes to distributor) was shipped out about 2 weeks ago, I think? The rolling out isn't quite as fast, though I think FiiO is probably playing it safe by keeping the production number relatively low as no one knows exactly how well BTR5 will be received, since it is definitely one of the most expensive BT adapter out there (*well, except for the one Oriolus made) and it costs more than some entry level DAP. Not to mention FiiO's core business is really in the DAP market these days. Though the positive point is that there is almost no competition at this point - UP4 is having issue, Oriolus just being too big while 5K is no where in sight.


----------



## nitinvaid20 (Dec 17, 2019)

holsen said:


> I would say resoundingly Yes.  Even though your connection will be over Bluetooth, you'll hear marked improvent in detail and depth of sound, provided your phone can broadcast LDAC.  If your considering the BTR3 I'd encourage you to look at the UP2.  I have both and much prefer the UP2.




Thanks really for your reply
And yes my device supports LDAC


----------



## holsen

nitinvaid20 said:


> Thanks really for your reply
> And yes my device supports LDAC


You'll be amazed at how much better LDAC transmission into a small portable DAC / Amp sounds vs direct cable connection to a phone.  You'll get much better Digital to Analogue conversion and cleaner, stronger output ....


----------



## nitinvaid20 (Dec 17, 2019)

holsen said:


> You'll be amazed at how much better LDAC transmission into a small portable DAC / Amp sounds vs direct cable connection to a phone.  You'll get much better Digital to Analogue conversion and cleaner, stronger output ....


Thanks
This btr3 I'll get tomorrow morning
And i have order another DAC mizu pro.
I'll leave feedback for both for sure.
And here are other Bluetooth settings do i have to change all


----------



## ClieOS

nitinvaid20 said:


> Thanks
> ...
> And here are other Bluetooth settings do i have to change all[



First, don't post full sized screenshot, shrink it down to PC friendly size first as I don't want to look through multiple 1440 x 3120 pictures when reading posts,

Secondly, change the LDAC setting to prioritize SQ first. If it is not stable, then change it to standard. If it is still not stable, then go back to prioritize playback quality.


----------



## nitinvaid20

ClieOS said:


> First, don't post full sized screenshot, shrink it down to PC friendly size first as I don't want to look through multiple 1440 x 3120 pictures when reading posts,
> 
> Secondly, change the LDAC setting to prioritize SQ first. If it is not stable, then change it to standard. If it is still not stable, then go back to prioritize playback quality.


okay got it
i got this today and yes its better then stock cable and wireless too although
Viper4android dont work with LDAC and dont know why i have to open fiio app and in setting have to connect everytime manually then only i get audio


----------



## nitinvaid20

ClieOS said:


> First, don't post full sized screenshot, shrink it down to PC friendly size first as I don't want to look through multiple 1440 x 3120 pictures when reading posts,
> 
> Secondly, change the LDAC setting to prioritize SQ first. If it is not stable, then change it to standard. If it is still not stable, then go back to prioritize playback quality.


was not able to edit the images so i deleted it


----------



## Lohb

nitinvaid20 said:


> was not able to edit the images so i deleted it


You can control the image sizes on this site then link to it for future reference.
https://postimages.org/


----------



## ClieOS

nitinvaid20 said:


> okay got it
> i got this today and yes its better then stock cable and wireless too although
> Viper4android dont work with LDAC and dont know why i have to open fiio app and in setting have to connect everytime manually then only i get audio



There is a 'FiiO Control' app I posted awhile ago, just uses that instead of FiiO Music.


----------



## nitinvaid20 (Dec 17, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> There is a 'FiiO Control' app I posted awhile ago, just uses that instead of FiiO Music.


Searched this thread not found it

so in the end its not like plug and play....

Any other suggestions

EDIT: Found it
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/fii...-ll-aptx-hd-ldac.918298/page-15#post-15351442


----------



## gravicap (Dec 18, 2019)

Have anyone listened to oriolus 1795 yet? Maybe in comparison to btr5?


----------



## Lohb

Is it possible to bring out a lossless receiver along lines of home networks DLNA/upNP over WIFI Direct...is it a cost and or size issue
to do wireless lossless like these other lossy formats ?


----------



## monsieurfromag3

gravicap said:


> Have anyone listened to oriolus 1795 yet? Maybe in comparison to btr5?


Terribly curious about it myself.


----------



## ClieOS

gravicap said:


> Have anyone listened to oriolus 1795 yet? Maybe in comparison to btr5?



I think the price and size of 1795 kinda makes it much more of a niche product in an already niche market. However, all the impression I read of it so far (mostly in Chinese) has said that it is great sounding. I won't doubt it as the guy behind Oriolus is the same person behind iBasso for many years (*the two split a few years ago).



Lohb said:


> Is it possible to bring out a lossless receiver along lines of home networks DLNA/upNP over WIFI Direct...is it a cost and or size issue
> to do wireless lossless like these other lossy formats ?



Bluetooth, as least for 5.0 and foreseeable next few years, will unlikely has the bandwidth to do full lossless transmission. But it is not to say we don't already has similar portable product in the market now. i.e. Chord Poly + Mojo.


----------



## gravicap

btw can't find 1795 at oriolus site https://www.en.oriolus.jp/products
As soon as it has mic, it need some sort of case with clip I suppose.


----------



## ClieOS (Dec 18, 2019)

gravicap said:


> btw can't find 1795 at oriolus site https://www.en.oriolus.jp/products
> As soon as it has mic, it need some sort of case with clip I suppose.



A little complicated to explain - the guy behinds 1795, as well as many older iBasso products, owns his own factory in China but not his own brand. The way he like to do business is to pair up with another company that will handle the branding as well as international market, while he and his factory will focus on engineering and manufacturing, as well as sale in China. This is how iBasso was ran in the past, and this is how Oriolus is ran currently. So far, 1795 is sold officially only in China, hence why you don't see it on the Japanese (*international) site - or at least till the Japanese partner decided to bring it out of China officially.

BTW, Oriolus is 95.9mm x 50.7mm x 15.4mm with an weight of 109g, which is almost 3 times the size and 2.5 times the weight of BTR5 and about the size and weight of a small cellphone / DAP, so you probably won't want to clip it anywhere on your upper body. As far as I know it doesn't come with a case and likely is meant to go into the user's pocket.


----------



## gravicap

What a story, thanks for sharing!
So I suppose it plays in xdsd field in terms of size and scenarios of use. Curious, how do they see using microphone then. Like you answer the call using this bt reciever and talk using its mic, no need to reach a phone in the other pocket/bag/room/city?


----------



## vnmslsrbms

ClieOS said:


> A little complicated to explain - the guy behinds 1795, as well as many older iBasso products, owns his own factory in China but not his own brand. The way he like to do business is to pair up with another company that will handle the branding as well as international market, while he and his factory will focus on engineering and manufacturing, as well as sale in China. This is how iBasso was ran in the past, and this is how Oriolus is ran currently. So far, 1795 is sold officially only in China, hence why you don't see it on the Japanese (*international) site - or at least till the Japanese partner decided to bring it out of China officially.
> 
> BTW, Oriolus is 95.9mm x 50.7mm x 15.4mm with an weight of 109g, which is almost 3 times the size and 2.5 times the weight of BTR5 and about the size and weight of a small cellphone / DAP, so you probably won't want to clip it anywhere on your upper body. As far as I know it doesn't come with a case and likely is meant to go into the user's pocket.



That explains it!  I always thought Oriolus was a Japanese company, but I guess the truth is somewhere in between.  The 1795 is way to big to be of any use.  Might as well clip a DAP (again who would do this) to your shirt if you want to use this?


----------



## Hanesu

gravicap said:


> Have anyone listened to oriolus 1795 yet? Maybe in comparison to btr5?



I ve heard it and it sounds decent! Could only compare it to my XDSD in bluetooth mode. The Oriolus sounds slightly brighter and has maybe slightly better detail retrieval. XDSD a bit rounder and warmer. But they both offer a similar quality of sound. I yet have to compare it to the Btr5 which I am eagerly waiting for.


----------



## JM22681

Hi all, new member here.  This thread has a wealth of information.  I have a bunch of questions but will try to streamline them.  My situation is rather simplistic, I just want to put a better bluetooth receiver, pre-Amp and DAC in front of my Audi MMI 3G+ (2015).  I found an AMI cable that has USB-C and 3.5mm headphone jack together, so I'm hoping to just keep it in my glove box permanently with power and audio always connected.  Post-receiver, I have a Mosconi DSP and Amp powering some classic MB Quart 6.5" speakers, and a JL Sub.  Honestly, I'm just trying to feed it a better wireless signal and hopefully take advantage of some of the newer DAC technology to get a better soundstage, etc.

So, I originally ordered the W5, however I'm now realizing that it doesn't seem to support power + use at the same time since the darn USB-C port is on the charging case.  So I'm now second guessing that decision as I really just want to use it as a passthrough, and I'm hoping it will never need to be manually charged/unplugged.  Let me know if I have that wrong.

My budget is roughly $100, so I'm going to rule out BTR5, 1795, and some of the products in that $150-250 range.  Given that size doesn't matter for my use case, here's what I think I'm left with:

W3 - looks like this could power/use at same time.  Can anyone confirm it can work that way?  And can it auto-power down, or is the battery going to run down every time i power off my car?  The price is right.
ES100 - seems like the gold standard as it does everything, including plays nice with car.  I get the impression the sound is not the best of the bunch, but not a bad option.  Looks like the price dropped to $80 yesterday.
Qudelix - obviously not out yet, but it seems like this thing is really promising.  I emailed them to see if there is any update on timeline.  Obviously some risk of being an early adopter/bugs/support longevity, etc.
UP2/UP4 - seems like people aren't super satisfied.
BTR3 - price is right, but reviews seem so-so.

I am leaning towards W3 vs waiting a month or two for Qudelix.  Thoughts?

Finally, because I'm so naive and this is my first one, I am assuming that:

1.) When i power it via USB-C and hook up headphone jack, my car stereo will NOT be able to render the song info on the display screen, and I'll be using my phone to drive that.
2.) My Apple iPhone X will perform nicely, but if I go to Android I can take advantage of better BT codec support.
3.) And my dumbest question of all - in order to take advantage of the DAC, i don't need my phone plugged in to the USB-C.  The DAC is still employed over BT (wireless), correct?

Thank you to anyone who is willing to weigh in


----------



## Mouseman

JM22681 said:


> Hi all, new member here.  This thread has a wealth of information.  I have a bunch of questions but will try to streamline them.  My situation is rather simplistic, I just want to put a better bluetooth receiver, pre-Amp and DAC in front of my Audi MMI 3G+ (2015).  I found an AMI cable that has USB-C and 3.5mm headphone jack together, so I'm hoping to just keep it in my glove box permanently with power and audio always connected.  Post-receiver, I have a Mosconi DSP and Amp powering some classic MB Quart 6.5" speakers, and a JL Sub.  Honestly, I'm just trying to feed it a better wireless signal and hopefully take advantage of some of the newer DAC technology to get a better soundstage, etc.
> 
> So, I originally ordered the W5, however I'm now realizing that it doesn't seem to support power + use at the same time since the darn USB-C port is on the charging case.  So I'm now second guessing that decision as I really just want to use it as a passthrough, and I'm hoping it will never need to be manually charged/unplugged.  Let me know if I have that wrong.
> 
> ...


The ES100 doesn't have USB-C, so it won't work with your cable unless you use an adapter. I'm not sure where you read that it doesn't have good sound. IMHO That's not the case, plus it has amazing EQ. It also works when powered. 

If you use the headphone in to your head unit, you won't get any art/title. Not sure how the phone would push that to the receiver since it's not the direct sound source. Either Android or iPhone has very good codecs, but some/most Androids have LDAC, which is considered the best one,although I'm really not sure you'll notice the difference between that and AAC or APT-X in the car. LDAC also doesn't do well with interference. No, you don't plug in your phone if you're using it wirelessly.


----------



## JM22681

Mouseman said:


> The ES100 doesn't have USB-C, so it won't work with your cable unless you use an adapter. I'm not sure where you read that it doesn't have good sound. IMHO That's not the case, plus it has amazing EQ. It also works when powered.
> 
> If you use the headphone in to your head unit, you won't get any art/title. Not sure how the phone would push that to the receiver since it's not the direct sound source. Either Android or iPhone has very good codecs, but some/most Androids have LDAC, which is considered the best one,although I'm really not sure you'll notice the difference between that and AAC or APT-X in the car. LDAC also doesn't do well with interference. No, you don't plug in your phone if you're using it wirelessly.



Didn’t mean to suggest it doesn’t have good sound, but it came across like w5 and potentially the chips in BTR5 and Qudelix (same) might be superior.

Thanks for your feedback and reminding me it doesn’t have USB-C.  Looks like it’s micro now that you mention it.


----------



## ClieOS

JM22681 said:


> ...
> 
> 1.) When i power it via USB-C and hook up headphone jack, my car stereo will NOT be able to render the song info on the display screen, and I'll be using my phone to drive that.
> 2.) My Apple iPhone X will perform nicely, but if I go to Android I can take advantage of better BT codec support.
> ...



I'll have my W3 in a few days, then I'll be able to say more about it. Qudelix 5K is still a long way off though.

Answer:
1) Yes, your car unit will not know what is playing.
2) Also yes, but make sure your Android phone supports LDAC first. Most do these days, but not all.
3) Yes again. Not need to plug your phone in.


----------



## JM22681

ClieOS said:


> I'll have my W3 in a few days, then I'll be able to say more about it. Qudelix 5K is still a long way off though.
> 
> Answer:
> 1) Yes, your car unit will not know what is playing.
> ...



Awesome, very interested in hearing your perception of W3, particularly whether it shuts off if idle, and if it can be used while charging, along with quality.

Also thx for confirming, I am looking at either the Pixel 4 or the S11e coming out in Feb.

One thing that seemed strange about the W3/W5 worth noting was that it appeared as if only Android OS’s can update firmware via HiBy Blue.  Based on that callout, I presume iOS can’t...


----------



## ClieOS

JM22681 said:


> One thing that seemed strange about the W3/W5 worth noting was that it appeared as if only Android OS’s can update firmware via HiBy Blue.  Based on that callout, I presume iOS can’t...



Mostly because Qualcomm (and CSR before it) never release any update kit for iOS. ES100 , which uses the same BT chip, can update under iOS because EarStudio writes their own update app instead of using Qualcomm stock update app - but this kind of software pwness is a bit beyond most other manufacturers ability. As for why Qualcomm doesn't release update kit under iOS - I reckon it has to do with the fact that both companies are not on particularly good term with each other.


----------



## JM22681

ClieOS said:


> Mostly because Qualcomm (and CSR before it) never release any update kit for iOS. ES100 , which uses the same BT chip, can update under iOS because EarStudio writes their own update app instead of using Qualcomm stock update app - but this kind of software pwness is a bit beyond most other manufacturers ability. As for why Qualcomm doesn't release update kit under iOS - I reckon it has to do with the fact that both companies are not on particularly good term with each other.



Now it makes sense!


----------



## JM22681

FYI - just stumbled upon Radsone’s Facebook page and looks like they are launching their next generation in January - the HUD100.  Various upgrades but namely 32bit/384kHz, DSD128, USB-C, and smaller form factor.

Guess I’ll be waiting!


----------



## ClieOS

JM22681 said:


> FYI - just stumbled upon Radsone’s Facebook page and looks like they are launching their next generation in January - the HUD100.  Various upgrades but namely 32bit/384kHz, DSD128, USB-C, and smaller form factor.
> 
> Guess I’ll be waiting!



It is really not a 'next generation' per se, as it is not a Bluetooth adapter like the ES100 but a small USB DAC.


----------



## JM22681

ClieOS said:


> It is really not a 'next generation' per se, as it is not a Bluetooth adapter like the ES100 but a small USB DAC.



Are you sure there is no Bluetooth chip?


----------



## ClieOS

JM22681 said:


> Are you sure there is no Bluetooth chip?



It will be very odd that Radsone decided Bluetooth is not an important feature to mention at all while just refer to it as an USB DAC.


----------



## rkw

JM22681 said:


> Are you sure there is no Bluetooth chip?


No Bluetooth. This is the USB DAC product they mentioned long ago and originally called the ES200. It appears that they have renamed it HUD200 to avoid confusion that it is a new version of ES100 (imo, a good decision).

Search for "radsone es200" on Facebook.
This was the first mention, back in May: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/radsone-earstudio-es100.867366/page-74#post-14233124


----------



## ClieOS

I think Radsone having lose their main designer to become their own competition isn't going to help them pushing for their next gen BT adapter.


----------



## JM22681

rkw said:


> No Bluetooth. This is the USB DAC product they mentioned long ago and originally called the ES200. It appears that they have renamed it HUD200 to avoid confusion that it is a new version of ES100 (imo, a good decision).
> 
> Search for "radsone es200" on Facebook.
> This was the first mention, back in May: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/radsone-earstudio-es100.867366/page-74#post-14233124



Thanks for the context and reference - I stand corrected!

I saw a short list of MK II enhancements now that it is out.  Is that one performing same/better than original ES100?

Their main designer = Qudelix, right?


----------



## ClieOS

JM22681 said:


> Thanks for the context and reference - I stand corrected!
> 
> I saw a short list of MK II enhancements now that it is out.  Is that one performing same/better than original ES100?
> 
> Their main designer = Qudelix, right?



ES100 MK2 has the same internal as the original ES100. Improvement limits to better outer casing, not better SQ.


----------



## Sergio88

The suggested price was not 100 dollars ?


----------



## ClieOS

Sergio88 said:


> The suggested price was not 100 dollars ?



Official price is set by various distributor around the world, so it will be high. Search around and you will find cheaper deal.


----------



## noobandroid (Dec 21, 2019)

ClieOS said:


> Official price is set by various distributor around the world, so it will be high. Search around and you will find cheaper deal.


red ape and generally others selling RM509, a good take or there could be cheaper?

should i take it to replace my btr3?


----------



## ClieOS

noobandroid said:


> red ape and generally others selling RM509, a good take or there could be cheaper?
> 
> should i take it to replace my btr3?



Taobao has BTR5 for RMB700, or USD$100 / RM415. Shipping from China to Malaysia should be around RM20 or so, but you need to read Chinese to understand how to use TB forwarder (otherwise it might be more expensive).

It is a significant upgrade over BTR3.


----------



## noobandroid

ClieOS said:


> Taobao has BTR5 for RMB700, or USD$100 / RM415. Shipping from China to Malaysia should be around RM20 or so, but you need to read Chinese to understand how to use TB forwarder (otherwise it might be more expensive).
> 
> It is a significant upgrade over BTR3.


so for my ciem, a 5BA 1 DD, you think it's a worthy up? cause i do know from zeos the amount of driving power in it, but do ciem even need as much power?


----------



## ClieOS

noobandroid said:


> so for my ciem, a 5BA 1 DD, you think it's a worthy up? cause i do know from zeos the amount of driving power in it, but do ciem even need as much power?



Power is the sum of voltage and current. For most multiple drivers IEM, you don't really need a lot of voltage but you will benefit from more current and low output impedance, which a good source will have. Proper driving power will give more control over the transducers, result in what we commonly refer as a 'tight' sound. It doesn't however mean you are getting a louder sound, but a more refined sound under the same volume.


----------



## rkw

ClieOS said:


> Power is the sum of voltage and current.


Slight correction: power is the product (multiplication) of voltage and current.


----------



## DanWiggins

rkw said:


> Slight correction: power is the product (multiplication) of voltage and current.


For most headphones (single dynamic drivers) this is generally true, but with multi-driver IEMs out there, and highly complex impedances, we do have a bit more to do.  Power is actually voltage times current times the cosine of the phase angle between current and voltage.

I would submit, though, that if you have to worry about this, then either you have way too little power in the first place, your headphone/IEM is very poorly designed (there is NO reason to have such a complex impedance where you're going to get more than 5 degrees of phase angle between voltage and current), or both.

It is surprising, at least to me, how many badly engineered IEMs and headphones there are out there, with impedances that swing an order or more in magnitude (and thus a corresponding phase angle between current and voltage) in the audio range.  Absolutely insane, and results in an IEM/headphone that DEMANDS a high quality amp between your source and the device.  About as non-consumer-friendly as you can get.

In the speaker world, we deal with high impedance swings by adding networks (commonly called Zobel networks) to make the impedance seen by the amp nice and flat, and eliminate this issue.  You can do the same thing in an IEM - without affecting sound quality - if you really cared about this issue.


----------



## JM22681

Anyone try the iFi xCAN?  Looks like it’s a year old, MSRP around $300.


----------



## Lohb

JM22681 said:


> Anyone try the iFi xCAN?  Looks like it’s a year old, MSRP around $300.


This thread is for smaller single unit dongles


----------



## episiarch

Also re the power discussion, all we're usually given to go on are single measurements (e.g. 50mW into 32 ohms) yet in the real world the transducer's load, the amplifier's response to it, and the amplifier's own output impedance combine in complicated ways as ClieOS and DanWiggins have pointed out. So the gadget's rated output doesn't necessarily directly translate to a clear answer about how nicely it will drive a particular earphone. With that said, my experience is that rated power output is still often a useful proxy for whatever the amp qualities are that do matter to music reproduction as I hear it.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

I don’t think there’s been mention of the Whooshi on this thread.
AptX HD and AAC, unspecified 32-bit Cirrus Logic DAC, SE output only, USB DAC mode. Looks slick. About $65 to $80.


----------



## ClieOS

monsieurfromag3 said:


> I don’t think there’s been mention of the Whooshi on this thread.
> AptX HD and AAC, unspecified 32-bit Cirrus Logic DAC, SE output only, USB DAC mode. Looks slick. About $65 to $80.



Added to the list. No LDAC support is quite unfortunate since the hardware they used is fully capable of it. Also I am not sure how accurate the listed spec is, judging from the hardware it used.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> Added to the list. No LDAC support is quite unfortunate since the hardware they used is fully capable of it. Also I am not sure how accurate the listed spec is, judging from the hardware it used.


No LDAC is fine by me if there’s aptX HD, my hypothesis is that LDAC doesn’t bring anything to the table in itself but is often tuned via DSP to boost the ranges that give “sparkle”, “airiness” and “detail” to please technical listeners. I mostly miss a 2.5mm balanced output, but judging from their design and marketing that’s not a concern of their main target demographic. Which sucks because I’m just tangential to their target, I enjoy good design and they included fine hardware but stopped just short of where it would win me over.


----------



## ClieOS

monsieurfromag3 said:


> No LDAC is fine by me if there’s aptX HD, my hypothesis is that LDAC doesn’t bring anything to the table in itself but is often tuned via DSP to boost the ranges that give “sparkle”, “airiness” and “detail” to please technical listeners. I mostly miss a 2.5mm balanced output, but judging from their design and marketing that’s not a concern of their main target demographic. Which sucks because I’m just tangential to their target, I enjoy good design and they included fine hardware but stopped just short of where it would win me over.



Not really sure where you get the idea of LDAC is tuned via DSP - measurement has been done by a few to show that, at least with LDAC SQ priority, there is some small technical benefit over than of aptX-HD (*while LDAC Standard is more or less than same performance as aptX-HD). The key point is however, there is no real downside for having LDAC with the Whooshi since it already has all the necessary hardware inside. While they will need to pay a license to use LDAC, I don't think it will cost that much since we already know a few BT adapter that are cheaper than Whooshi already supports LDAC. So there is no extra hardware cost and the software cost isn't likely to be significant, then the only conclusion I can draw is that the Whooshi team is either too lazy or not dedicated enough to implement it, since aptX-HD required very little effort to implement as it comes stock with Qualcomm CSR8675. I recalled even Radsone ES100 didn't come with LDAC at first, but they eventually implemented it due to popular demand and that really helps to boost their sale.


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge (Dec 26, 2019)

Hi everyone, I'm looking for something around $50. I generally prefer balanced/neutral sound and I listen to variety of music genres like Indian and Western classical, rock, punk, metal, pop, hip-hop, EDM and fusion. I'm currently using Redmi K20 Pro that has decent sound output but I want something which helps in turning most of iems into BT without need for iem modules and also improving overall performance. Also, calling support would be a good to have feature. So far Hiby W3 looks like a good option. Any other recommendations? Thanks in advance


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> Not really sure where you get the idea of LDAC is tuned via DSP - measurement has been done by a few to show that, at least with LDAC SQ priority, there is some small technical benefit over than of aptX-HD (*while LDAC Standard is more or less than same performance as aptX-HD). The key point is however, there is no real downside for having LDAC with the Whooshi since it already has all the necessary hardware inside. While they will need to pay a license to use LDAC, I don't think it will cost that much since we already know a few BT adapter that are cheaper than Whooshi already supports LDAC. So there is no extra hardware cost and the software cost isn't likely to be significant, then the only conclusion I can draw is that the Whooshi team is either too lazy or not dedicated enough to implement it, since aptX-HD required very little effort to implement as it comes stock with Qualcomm CSR8675. I recalled even Radsone ES100 didn't come with LDAC at first, but they eventually implemented it due to popular demand and that really helps to boost their sale.


LDAC is technically better for sure, but it’s like the difference between CD-quality FLAC and MQA - when it’s beyond audible, well...

On the other hand every manufacturer implements codecs in a different way, and that can have a very noticeable impact on sound.

I’d be wary of dropping the L word without a care, these guys took pains to create an original design with a welcome touch of modern aesthetics, that alone tells me there is dedication. LDAC is probably easier to license now that it’s on every phone, but that’s on the emitter side. Sony, I’ve been told by industry insiders, were until very recently at least much less generous on the receiver side, pressuring their would-be partners for codec exclusivity, and Qualcomm do the same.


----------



## ClieOS

monsieurfromag3 said:


> LDAC is technically better for sure, but it’s like the difference between CD-quality FLAC and MQA - when it’s beyond audible, well...
> 
> On the other hand every manufacturer implements codecs in a different way, and that can have a very noticeable impact on sound.
> 
> I’d be wary of dropping the L word without a care, these guys took pains to create an original design with a welcome touch of modern aesthetics, that alone tells me there is dedication. LDAC is probably easier to license now that it’s on every phone, but that’s on the emitter side. Sony, I’ve been told by industry insiders, were until very recently at least much less generous on the receiver side, pressuring their would-be partners for codec exclusivity, and Qualcomm do the same.



Nothing new on exclusivity there, as that is probably how 90% of tech industry works. If you think you are happy with what Whooshi is offering, then good for you. But I only see generic design, nothing more. Nothing wrong with generic design on its own of course, just that the competitions are better. If a company is making something pretty similar to its competitions, then it should create more value in its product by either offering it on a cheaper price or with an unique feature. The least it can do is offering the same set of features as the competitions, otherwise it is not going to be particularly successful.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> Nothing new on exclusivity there, as that is probably how 90% of tech industry works. If you think you are happy with what Whooshi is offering, then good for you. But I only see generic design, nothing more. Nothing wrong with generic design on its own of course, just that the competitions are better. If a company is making something pretty similar to its competitions, then it should create more value in its product by either offering it on a cheaper price or with an unique feature. The least it can do is offering the same set of features as the competitions, otherwise it is not going to be particularly successful.


You are not reading me properly and that’s okay. Generic design is not “good for me” (very contemptuous turn of phrase by the way). I won't buy a Whooshi, because their technical design is, indeed, just a touch too generic for me. Which is too bad because they insist on their DAC and HD codec, but I don’t think SQ will be any better than what I already have or am expecting. Their aesthetic design on the other hand is a unique feature in a sea of little black rectangles, which is why I am disappointed they didn’t go for more ambitious audio hardware. Adding LDAC would mostly just mean ticking off the usual boxes on the audiophile male checklist though.


----------



## JM22681

Anyone post a W3 review yet?


----------



## ClieOS

monsieurfromag3 said:


> You are not reading me properly and that’s okay. Generic design is not “good for me” (very contemptuous turn of phrase by the way). I won't buy a Whooshi, because their technical design is, indeed, just a touch too generic for me. Which is too bad because they insist on their DAC and HD codec, but I don’t think SQ will be any better than what I already have or am expecting. Their aesthetic design on the other hand is a unique feature in a sea of little black rectangles, which is why I am disappointed they didn’t go for more ambitious audio hardware. Adding LDAC would mostly just mean ticking off the usual boxes on the audiophile male checklist though.



I am more of a function over form, if that's part of a 'male checklist' thing.



JM22681 said:


> Anyone post a W3 review yet?



Currently in progress. Will post in short future.


----------



## AlexFL

Can you share Hiby W3 sound quality and tuning impressions please? Would be great to how it compares to ES100. Thanks!


----------



## ClieOS

AlexFL said:


> Can you share Hiby W3 sound quality and tuning impressions please? Would be great to how it compares to ES100. Thanks!



Will post it tonight, as well as the updated impression on UP4.


----------



## ClieOS

Hiby W3 and revised Shanling UP4 impression posted. Detail see 2nd post.


----------



## JM22681

Thank you!

Do you find the 3.5mm comparable between W3 and BTR5, or does one edge out the other if you put aside the 2.5mm balanced on BTR5?


----------



## ClieOS

JM22681 said:


> Thank you!
> 
> Do you find the 3.5mm comparable between W3 and BTR5, or does one edge out the other if you put aside the 2.5mm balanced on BTR5?



Comparable? Yes. But if I can only pick just one for 3.5mm only, I'll probably go for W3.


----------



## AlexFL

ClieOS said:


> Will post it tonight, as well as the updated impression on UP4.


Thank you for sharing the W3. Can you please compare the W3 tonality to single ended of ES100? Is it darker or similar mids\treble extension?


----------



## ClieOS (Jan 5, 2020)

AlexFL said:


> Thank you for sharing the W3. Can you please compare the W3 tonality to single ended of ES100? Is it darker or similar mids\treble extension?



ES100 has a sound that is neutral tilting toward cold, as opposite to W3's neutral tilting toward warmth - the upper mid to treble performance between the two are fairly similar, but W3 has a slightly fuller lower end body. The small difference give ES100 a cleaner and more opened sound, where W3 a more balanced tonality.


----------



## AlexFL

ClieOS said:


> ES100 has a sound that is neutral tilting toward cold, as opposite to W3's neutral tilting toward warmth - the upper mid to treble performance between the two are fairly similar, but W3 has a slightly fuller lower end body. The small difference give ES100 a cleaner and more opened sound, where W3 a more balanced tonality.


Thanks for the feedback. I actually loved that clean forward sounding upper mids and highs presentation of ES with SE846, the only issue was occasional sibilance. Ordered W3, will share impressions soon.


----------



## CuriousN (Jan 9, 2020)

Is using the equalizer or various DSP settings directly on the Bluetooth adapter superior in any way to using them on the device, which is playing the audio, such as smartphone or a desktop computer?

Perhaps, the lack of equalizer support for LDAC on the FiiO BTR5 is not much of an issue, given that one can use an equalizer on the computer or smartphone.


----------



## Raketen

CuriousN said:


> Is using the equalizer or various DSP settings directly on the Bluetooth adapter superior in any way to using them on the device, which is playing the audio, such as smartphone or a desktop computer?
> 
> Perhaps, the lack of equalizer support for LDAC on the FiiO BTR5 is not much of an issue, given that one can use an equalizer on the computer or smartphone.



One advantage is that unless your phone has built in EQ or something like Viper4Android there are apps where you can't EQ the sound. Also I don't think all EQ is created equally, some apps are better than others-  I guess ideally a BT device with good dsp processing could be better than many software EQ options, though there are some very good apps like Neutron etc.. so I am not too sold on that. Another advantage is that for instance something like the ES100 remembers your eq setting when you're using it with other devices without the app.


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

Raketen said:


> One advantage is that unless your phone has built in EQ or something like Viper4Android there are apps where you can't EQ the sound. Also I don't think all EQ is created equally, some apps are better than others-  I guess ideally a BT device with good dsp processing could be better than many software EQ options, though there are some very good apps like Neutron etc.. so I am not too sold on that. Another advantage is that for instance something like the ES100 remembers your eq setting when you're using it with other devices without the app.



I'm on a rooted Redmi K20 Pro with Viper and Neutron. Does having a BT adapter like Hiby W3 makes any significant difference to the sound? Just asking out of curiosity since you're aware about this as I've already placed an order for Hiby W3


----------



## Raketen (Jan 9, 2020)

Dani157 said:


> I'm on a rooted Redmi K20 Pro with Viper and Neutron. Does having a BT adapter like Hiby W3 makes any significant difference to the sound? Just asking out of curiosity since you're aware about this as I've already placed an order for Hiby W3



I guess technically speaking BT will degrade sound quality, but how noticable that is vs device SQ depends on situation (source file quality, connection quality, device capability etc...) . IDK the W3 or Redmi. Personally I use ES100 more for its practical application (bluetooth function, tiny size, shirt clip, fine grain volume, system wide EQ, playback controls) than the sound quality.

Overall SQ of the ES100 _might_ be marginally better than my phones from the BAL (which also seems to be a little better at driving some of my IEMs), but I use a v30 and HTC10- The SQ of those phones is good enough for me that if I don't need the BT I don't generally use the ES100 (though I'm also a DAP user).

In terms of EQ quality, I don't think ES100 is better than Neutron but obviously YMMV- idk if W3 integrates MSEB somehow, my experience with Hiby R3 is that MSEB is very cool but didn't seem to work particularly well on that DAP.


----------



## ClieOS

Dani157 said:


> I'm on a rooted Redmi K20 Pro with Viper and Neutron. Does having a BT adapter like Hiby W3 makes any significant difference to the sound? Just asking out of curiosity since you're aware about this as I've already placed an order for Hiby W3



It will be mostly down to how good/bad the internal DAC/amp section of Redmi is. Unless the smartphone itself already has a pretty good DAC/amp (i.e. LG), there is a better chance that a good BT adapter will ound better.


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

Raketen said:


> I guess technically speaking BT will degrade sound quality, but how noticable that is vs device SQ depends on situation (source file quality, connection quality, device capability etc...) . IDK the W3 or Redmi. Personally I use ES100 more for its practical application (bluetooth function, tiny size, shirt clip, fine grain volume, system wide EQ, playback controls) than the sound quality.
> 
> Overall SQ of the ES100 _might_ be marginally better than my phones from the BAL (which also seems to be a little better at driving some of my IEMs), but I use a v30 and HTC10- The SQ of those phones is good enough for me that if I don't need the BT I don't generally use the ES100 (though I'm also a DAP user).
> 
> In terms of EQ quality, I don't think ES100 is better than Neutron but obviously YMMV- idk if W3 integrates MSEB somehow, my experience with Hiby R3 is that MSEB is very cool but didn't seem to work particularly well on that DAP.



Thanks for your inputs 



ClieOS said:


> It will be mostly down to how good/bad the internal DAC/amp section of Redmi is. Unless the smartphone itself already has a pretty good DAC/amp (i.e. LG), there is a better chance that a good BT adapter will ound better.



Redmi has Qualcomm's flagship DAC/Amp WCD9340 which is very decent on it it's own. Might not be as great as ESS or AKM but certainly not pathetic as well. I suppose W3 is a gamble worth taking. Thanks for your inputs


----------



## CuriousN

Does the FiiO BTR5 support line-in controls on headphones for Apple devices (both as Bluetooth and USB DAC)?  I am referring to the ones that use OMTP, rather than CTIA (reference: https://mashtips.com/apple-headphone-on-android-or-windows/ )


----------



## ClieOS

CuriousN said:


> Does the FiiO BTR5 support line-in controls on headphones for Apple devices (both as Bluetooth and USB DAC)?  I am referring to the ones that use OMTP, rather than CTIA (reference: https://mashtips.com/apple-headphone-on-android-or-windows/ )



IIRC, OMTP standard, originally promoted by Nokia and Ericsson alike, has been abandoned by the smartphone industry a few years ago when they switch to CTIA standard, which is promoted by Apple and Google. Unless you are using very old headset,  there is very small chance you will find OMTP vs CTIA a problem. Every new headphone since about 5~6 years ago comes only as CTIA configuration.

BTR5 supports in-line control as USB DAC, but only as hardware volume control for BTR5 and not software volume control on Windows / smartphone. It doesn't support mic-input nor play/pause..


----------



## DannyBai

ClieOS, 

have you heard the AK10 and how does it sound/compare to the current units like the UP4 and BTR5?


----------



## ClieOS

DannyBai said:


> ClieOS,
> 
> have you heard the AK10 and how does it sound/compare to the current units like the UP4 and BTR5?



No, haven't heard it myself.


----------



## Raketen

Some interesting bluetooth news, LC3 codec- focus not on improving audio quality but improving compression efficiency and battery life, as well as simultaneous multistreaming. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/202...i-stream-audio-to-next-generation-of-devices/


----------



## ClieOS (Jan 12, 2020)

Raketen said:


> Some interesting bluetooth news, LC3 codec- focus not on improving audio quality but improving compression efficiency and battery life, as well as simultaneous multistreaming. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/202...i-stream-audio-to-next-generation-of-devices/



It will require both ends (source and receiver) to support it. which probably won't happen in a year or two. But as you have said, it isn't targeting the HiFi community so we won't see much benefit from it.


----------



## CuriousN

ClieOS said:


> IIRC, OMTP standard, originally promoted by Nokia and Ericsson alike, has been abandoned by the smartphone industry a few years ago when they switch to CTIA standard, which is promoted by Apple and Google. Unless you are using very old headset, there is very small chance you will find OMTP vs CTIA a problem. Every new headphone since about 5~6 years ago comes only as CTIA configuration.



I hope this is not too off-topic.  So, headphones, such as RHA T20i, which are marketed for Apple devices, should have CTIA-compatible controls (rather than OMTP) and should work with FiiO BTR5?


----------



## ClieOS

CuriousN said:


> I hope this is not too off-topic.  So, headphones, such as RHA T20i, which are marketed for Apple devices, should have CTIA-compatible controls (rather than OMTP) and should work with FiiO BTR5?



Yes, it should.


----------



## gravicap

Did anyone receive oriolus 1795 yet? It is on sale for some time, but still little to no reviews out there.


----------



## sinquito

ClieOS said:


> Comparable? Yes. But if I can only pick just one for 3.5mm only, I'll probably go for W3.


I actually have the same question, I am thinking about buying the BTR5, but I don't plan to use it with its balanced output. What about power on the hiby W3? The listed specs are 32 mW @ 32 ohms vs 80 mW @ 32 ohms for the Fiio.


----------



## ClieOS

sinquito said:


> I actually have the same question, I am thinking about buying the BTR5, but I don't plan to use it with its balanced output. What about power on the hiby W3? The listed specs are 32 mW @ 32 ohms vs 80 mW @ 32 ohms for the Fiio.



Power is quite decent on the W3. Might not be as much as BTR5, but should be enough for most headphone out there.


----------



## AlexFL

sinquito said:


> I actually have the same question, I am thinking about buying the BTR5, but I don't plan to use it with its balanced output. What about power on the hiby W3? The listed specs are 32 mW @ 32 ohms vs 80 mW @ 32 ohms for the Fiio.


If you have iPhone dongle it is exactly the same amount of power. The Dongle is more U shaped comparing to W3 and you may perceive more details from it. I think W3 should be a perfect match for V\U shaped IEMs to balance the sound. It works perfect with Apple CCA adaptor and I definitely like the W3 design better then ES100 but ES is probably 50% more powerful from single ended, it did drive my HD660S better.


----------



## sinquito

AlexFL said:


> If you have iPhone dongle it is exactly the same amount of power. The Dongle is more U shaped comparing to W3 and you may perceive more details from it. I think W3 should be a perfect match for V\U shaped IEMs to balance the sound. It works perfect with Apple CCA adaptor and I definitely like the W3 design better then ES100 but ES is probably 50% more powerful from single ended, it did drive my HD660S better.



Did you use the ES100 single ended with the HD660s? How was the sound out of it?
Actually I am leaning towards the Fiio BTR5 because it has more power and I would like to use it on high impedance headphones like HD58X and DT1990.


----------



## AlexFL

sinquito said:


> Did you use the ES100 single ended with the HD660s? How was the sound out of it?
> Actually I am leaning towards the Fiio BTR5 because it has more power and I would like to use it on high impedance headphones like HD58X and DT1990.


I used ES100 SE with 660s and it was surprisingly good driving them, it has high mids\lower highs forward sound and I liked it better then LG G7 HIM. I actually preferred it to Mojo tuning when used as wired DAC. I think AKM mobile dac\amp implementations are better then ESS solutions, that Velvet Sound is something special.  ES100 SQ is the same from SE or Balanced, just more power and ES100 could properly drive my power hungry Final E5000 earphones. 
I would buy both FIIO and ES and return one. I noticed that they all need at leas 48 hours burn in.


----------



## AlexFL

AlexFL said:


> I used ES100 SE with 660s and it was surprisingly good driving them, it has high mids\lower highs forward sound and I liked it better then LG G7 HIM. I actually preferred it to Mojo tuning when used as wired DAC. I think AKM mobile dac\amp implementations are better then ESS solutions, that Velvet Sound is something special.  ES100 SQ is the same from SE or Balanced, just more power and ES100 could properly drive my power hungry Final E5000 earphones.
> I would buy both FIIO and ES and return one. I noticed that they all need at leas 48 hours burn in.





 

And do yourself a favor and get one of those balanced cables for HD6XX. It makes a huge difference comparing to stock, opening up the details and you can use it with ES100 or BTR5 Balanced. I use it with W3 today with FIIO 2.5 to SE adaptor and I like what I hear, plenty of volume from W3 on Max and  all dynamics and bass is there. If I didn’t get that balanced cable I would sell my HD660S long time ago.


----------



## C_Lindbergh

Is there any BT receiver with QI wireless charging? It's strange that it isn't more common, after all BT audio is mostly about convenience, and wireless charging convenience defined.


----------



## gr8soundz

C_Lindbergh said:


> Is there any BT receiver with QI wireless charging? It's strange that it isn't more common, after all BT audio is mostly about convenience, and wireless charging convenience defined.



https://www.audiolab.co.uk/nano/


----------



## C_Lindbergh

gr8soundz said:


> https://www.audiolab.co.uk/nano/



Ah, yes forgot about that one, but it feels so last gen, BT 4.1, 8 hours battery life etc.


----------



## tiamor988

JM22681 said:


> Hi all, new member here.  This thread has a wealth of information.  I have a bunch of questions but will try to streamline them.  My situation is rather simplistic, I just want to put a better bluetooth receiver, pre-Amp and DAC in front of my Audi MMI 3G+ (2015).  I found an AMI cable that has USB-C and 3.5mm headphone jack together, so I'm hoping to just keep it in my glove box permanently with power and audio always connected.  Post-receiver, I have a Mosconi DSP and Amp powering some classic MB Quart 6.5" speakers, and a JL Sub.  Honestly, I'm just trying to feed it a better wireless signal and hopefully take advantage of some of the newer DAC technology to get a better soundstage, etc.
> 
> So, I originally ordered the W5, however I'm now realizing that it doesn't seem to support power + use at the same time since the darn USB-C port is on the charging case.  So I'm now second guessing that decision as I really just want to use it as a passthrough, and I'm hoping it will never need to be manually charged/unplugged.  Let me know if I have that wrong.
> 
> ...


Good news. HiBy W3 just release an update with car mode. It will automatically turn on when charger is connected. But will not turn off when charger is disconnected. It will automatically turn off eventually when nothing is connected.


----------



## sinquito

AlexFL said:


> And do yourself a favor and get one of those balanced cables for HD6XX. It makes a huge difference comparing to stock, opening up the details and you can use it with ES100 or BTR5 Balanced. I use it with W3 today with FIIO 2.5 to SE adaptor and I like what I hear, plenty of volume from W3 on Max and  all dynamics and bass is there. If I didn’t get that balanced cable I would sell my HD660S long time ago.



I will give it a thought, any recommendations for the balanced cable?


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

After a few days of playing with my Hiby W3, it's not bad but feel that it can have better optimizations via app. In terms of power, I don't feel much difference from my rooted Redmi K20 Pro's output but the sound is much more clean and refined. Tried them with T2 and BL03 and felt they sound very neat. Although I have to crank up the volume a bit. I usually prefer listening at low to moderate volumes but was always plagued by some noise. W3 elimiantes that noise. It is a great to have accessory. Just my humble opinions for those who intend to purchase them.


----------



## greyforest

how about fiio q5s？


----------



## ClieOS

greyforest said:


> how about fiio q5s？



Out of the scope of this discussion.


----------



## sinquito

@ClieOS I remembered that you recommended the Sony MW1 back in the day. That's been my only bluetooth dongle/receiver, do you think that I will hear/see some improvements with the BTR5? I already ordered, but I would like to hear your opinion.


----------



## ClieOS

sinquito said:


> @ClieOS I remembered that you recommended the Sony MW1 back in the day. That's been my only bluetooth dongle/receiver, do you think that I will hear/see some improvements with the BTR5? I already ordered, but I would like to hear your opinion.



MW1 is definitely one of the best BT adapter of its era. Its SBC 320kbps codec (during a time where SBC 128kbps was the common standard) can actually rival aptX easily. It is unfortunate that Sony never see the potential of it but instead going backward on their future BT adapter design. As far as SQ goes, I reckon MW1 is almost as good as any good BT adapter today - might not quite as good as BTR5, but it isn't actually that far away either.


----------



## AlexFL

sinquito said:


> I will give it a thought, any recommendations for the balanced cable?


I liked the brown cable, bought it on EBay. It is as thin as IEM, very convenient and sounds much better then stock.


----------



## AlexFL

I have burned in W3 for 48 hours and repeated A\B with iPhone dongle. I definitely prefer the W3 sound. It is so organic, wonderfully balanced with great details across the range. I love the mids it produces comparing to other gear. Definitely a keeper.


----------



## JJSEA

I got a W3 and I like the sound. The problem I have is that it does not work (either for charging or as a DAC) with a USB-C to USB-C cable. It works only with a USB-A to USB-C cable. I have tried several different USB-C to USB-C cables with no success.

Do any similar Bluetooth adapters (e.g. Shanling UP2) work properly with USB-C to USB-C cable? I want one I can use with my iPad Pro both to charge and as a DAC.


----------



## ClieOS

JJSEA said:


> I got a W3 and I like the sound. The problem I have is that it does not work (either for charging or as a DAC) with a USB-C to USB-C cable. It works only with a USB-A to USB-C cable. I have tried several different USB-C to USB-C cables with no success.
> 
> Do any similar Bluetooth adapters (e.g. Shanling UP2) work properly with USB-C to USB-C cable? I want one I can use with my iPad Pro both to charge and as a DAC.



UP2 won't work as well. What you need is probably a small USB hub between the iPad Pro and W3


----------



## JJSEA

Thanks. Inspired by your suggestion, I found an easy solution to connect my W3 to my iPad Pro: use a "USB C to USB A 3.0 OTG adapter" (costs about $2) together with a normal USB C to USB A cable. With this both the DAC and charging work.


----------



## greyforest

ok just got a oriolus 1795 i will do a simple comparison here for future reference 

Comparison between Es100, up4 , 1795

1795 is not as easy to use as es100 or up4, mainly because of the forward and backward buttons is the same as the volume button, very painful to operate as the volume adjustment is weird as well.  Also during my 2 hour of usage the device powered off by some reason. 

Sound: up4 sounds very warm and thick, with less detail is presented compared to es100 or 1795. But it is the one most easy to listen to, with zero harshness and quite forgiving for record quality. 

Es100 among those three have the best horizontal soundstage and detail revealing, also the transparency wins quite a margin. With an competent app to eq the sound its a bargain and  i would call it a low end dap killer.

1795 sounded warm with oriolus sound signatures(unique female vocal), slightly less detailed as es100 , narrower horizontal soundstage but with noticeable better vertical and frontal depth. There is some noises if you are using  sensitive item or pushing the power to the maximum level.  Overall it remains in the same league as es100, but noticeably less transparent compare to es100. I know there are people don’t care about transparency and would definitely consider 1795 to have better sound compare to es100. Besides all that The imaging is lager compare to es100, with an emphasis on low end. 

Despite the larger size 1795 have less power than es100 with less battery time and longer charging time as well. (Yep the typec and wireless charging is completely useless because it only have 5w capability)

 also tested usb-dac function of 1795, i would say it is better than the es100(usb-dac mode) with the soundstage widened imaging is improved as well. 

So as conclusion I recommend es100 as the overall experience is much better than the others, if you only enjoy classical or jazz es100 is the best choice among the three. Up4 have a volume nob which is something the next gen es100 or q5k should definitely consider to add on. I only recommend anyone who have the need for a semi decent usb dac to get 1795 as the wireless experience is some what forgettable. Or you have a real passion for female vocal music with a iem that is dedicated for that as well. 

The headphone i used for this test is final a8000 and audioquest nightowl.


----------



## gravicap

@greyforest Thanks for sharing your impression! Did you try balanced output of es100/1795?


----------



## greyforest

gravicap said:


> @greyforest Thanks for sharing your impression! Did you try balanced output of es100/1795?



All of the impressions is based on balanced output Of both devices , with aptx codec. I use cracked android 7.1 it does not have ldac. To be honest i like the se output on 1795 better than the bal. it just have more coherence and sounded much thicker as well.


----------



## Mirakoolz

Hi

Sincere apologies if im in the wrong thread, but;

im looking at adding Bluetooth to my PC to use with wireless earbuds and headphones.
would any USB Dongle available on eBay do? i'd like it to be long lasting by having support for the latest standards for audio - does one exist?

thanks in advance


----------



## gravicap

If anyone can compare oriolus 1795 to ifi xdsd - would be great to hear your impressions.


----------



## ClieOS

Mirakoolz said:


> Hi
> 
> Sincere apologies if im in the wrong thread, but;
> 
> ...



The best codec to get will be LDAC. But as far as I know, there is no Bluetooth USB dongle that support LDAC, or at least me search over the last year or two have yielded nothing. The best I have found is aptX-HD. There is a work-around which you can get LDAC support DAP that also support BT transmission, which can act like an USB dongle when connected to PC, but result tends to be much less stable than an actual USB dongle though still usable.


----------



## SilverEars

ClieOS said:


> The best codec to get will be LDAC. But as far as I know, there is no Bluetooth USB dongle that support LDAC, or at least me search over the last year or two have yielded nothing. The best I have found is aptX-HD. There is a work-around which you can get LDAC support DAP that also support BT transmission, which can act like an USB dongle when connected to PC, but result tends to be much less stable than an actual USB dongle though still usable.


Another solution would be to use a portable device that is capable of streaming LDAC connected to the same network that the PC is connected to, and pull the music file stream from the PC to the portable device.


----------



## mentega

Hi guys,

I know this question is relevant only to those of you who have earphones with mmcx connectors but i was wondering if anyone could compare the bt receivers listed so far to the shure bluetooth cable V2?
It’s ridicoloiusly expensive when compared to say the ES100 or the Hiby W3. So i’m not shure if you are paying just for the brand or there is actually any improvement in sound quality.

Cheers


----------



## ClieOS

mentega said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I know this question is relevant only to those of you who have earphones with mmcx connectors but i was wondering if anyone could compare the bt receivers listed so far to the shure bluetooth cable V2?
> It’s ridicoloiusly expensive when compared to say the ES100 or the Hiby W3. So i’m not shure if you are paying just for the brand or there is actually any improvement in sound quality.
> ...



If you are referring Shure RMCE-BT2, my research indicates that it uses CSR8675 as an all-in-one solution. This particular chip is already used on most of the adapters listed in the 1st post and just about any BT adapter in the list with [ CSR8675 + xxx ] will beat it in SQ (* xxx = independent codec chip), including ES100 and W3.


----------



## mentega

ClieOS said:


> If you are referring Shure RMCE-BT2, my research indicates that it uses CSR8675 as an all-in-one solution. This particular chip is already used on most of the adapters listed in the 1st post and just about any BT adapter in the list with [ CSR8675 + xxx ] will beat it in SQ (* xxx = independent codec chip), including ES100 and W3.[/QUOTE
> 
> Yes that’s what i was referring to.
> So it seems that forking out more than 100 quid for the shure really doesnt make any sense when you can get say a w3 for half the price with theoretical better sq and also support to ldac.
> ...


----------



## mrnikt

A question to HiBy W3 users. 
On the second post, ClieOS wrote that " the volume control on the W3 itself actually control the software volume on your smartphone".
_I struggle with Redmi Note 8T - loudness limitation. Until I used 16 Ohm IEMs everything was ok, but now switching to 32 Ohm Marshalls - volume is way to low. Even changing the region won't help._
SO... would I , using HiBy W3,  get good volume boost ?? 
Or are these matters unrelated ?


----------



## peter123

mrnikt said:


> A question to HiBy W3 users.
> On the second post, ClieOS wrote that " the volume control on the W3 itself actually control the software volume on your smartphone".
> _I struggle with Redmi Note 8T - loudness limitation. Until I used 16 Ohm IEMs everything was ok, but now switching to 32 Ohm Marshalls - volume is way to low. Even changing the region won't help._
> SO... would I , using HiBy W3,  get good volume boost ??
> Or are these matters unrelated ?



These matters should be unrelated but I've got no experience with the W3 an no nothing about its output specs so hopefully someone who owns it can help you better.


----------



## ClieOS

mrnikt said:


> A question to HiBy W3 users.
> On the second post, ClieOS wrote that " the volume control on the W3 itself actually control the software volume on your smartphone".
> _I struggle with Redmi Note 8T - loudness limitation. Until I used 16 Ohm IEMs everything was ok, but now switching to 32 Ohm Marshalls - volume is way to low. Even changing the region won't help._
> SO... would I , using HiBy W3,  get good volume boost ??
> Or are these matters unrelated ?



You need to install 'Hiby Blue' app from Play Store, and you can use it to adjust hardware gain on the W3 (and also software volume limiter).


----------



## Infoseeker (Jan 26, 2020)

Got the truly wireless Bluetooth modules, *FiiO uTWS1* mmcx version to use with my Shuoer Tapes (104db sensitivity) .

These have a lower gain than my Trn B20s. I have to use them at full volume or 1 click from full volume.

I imagine these are setup like the older B20 model. Making them good more suitable for very sensitive iems. They probably will not hiss.

Too bad I don't own extreme sensitive iems.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Infoseeker said:


> Got the truly wireless Bluetooth modules, *FiiO uTWS1* mmcx version to use with my Shuoer Tapes (104db sensitivity) .
> 
> These have a lower gain than my Trn B20s. I have to use them at full volume or 1 click from full volume.
> 
> ...


I am using the UTWS1 with the IMR R1, which are not too different from the Rah (about 32 ohms impedance and 108dB sensitivity), and can drive them very loud. I had the opposite issue from yours when I tried the Nuforce HEM8 (same impedance but 124dB sensitivity) where I get digital hiss.

My main issue with volume is how large the steps are - it means you have to keep your source close by to fine-tune.

How do you find comfort? Have you tried them with the Rah?


----------



## ClieOS

Infoseeker said:


> Got the truly wireless Bluetooth modules, *FiiO uTWS1* mmcx version to use with my Shuoer Tapes (104db sensitivity) .
> 
> These have a lower gain than my Trn B20s. I have to use them at full volume or 1 click from full volume.
> 
> ...



Probably not the right discussion for this particular thread since it doesn't support 24bit. I did start another thread for this: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-tws-neckband-bt-cable-adapter-thread.920709/


----------



## sinquito

Ok, so I got my BTR5 this week, today I opened it. First impressions are good, I was expecting a lack of power in the single ended output based on my previous experience with the Q5s. This little fella has some oomph, it can drive my HD600 to decent levels with volume set at 35/60 on high gain, excelent! My Sony MW1 could also drive the HD600 but the volume was always close to the max (14/16 or so). The MW1 is ever so smaller, but feels kinda cheap next to the glass and aluminum of the BTR5. SQ both sound the same to me (very good). The Sony was very old (Bluetooth 3.0, SBC only, I think) but did the job. Actually the Sony has more buttons (next, play, previous, menu back, and volume rockers) and the screen is bigger with more characters, plus it had a micro sd card slot so it could be used as an stand alone player and had FM radio!!!

Any way, I am pretty satisfied with the Fiio, definitely has more power than expected and it can be used as USB DAC, which the Sony could not do it. Will report back if anything happens, but I am confident that it's going to performs as expected.


----------



## mrnikt

Another question to HiBy W3 users, who own it for quite a long time.
Do you have any comments on the construction of the device. I found the opinion of a user from Russia who complained about the poor attachment of the headphone jack socket to the circuit board. In his case, the socket detached from the board in a way that prevents re-soldering.
Maybe it's isolated case...but I want to ask you all


----------



## ClieOS

mrnikt said:


> Another question to HiBy W3 users, who own it for quite a long time.
> Do you have any comments on the construction of the device. I found the opinion of a user from Russia who complained about the poor attachment of the headphone jack socket to the circuit board. In his case, the socket detached from the board in a way that prevents re-soldering.
> Maybe it's isolated case...but I want to ask you all



Can't say I detected any problem with mine so far.


----------



## mrnikt

ClieOS said:


> Can't say I detected any problem with mine so far.


Thanks 
Did you use it as a USB DAC ? I read it works only 44,1 kHz / 16 bit ?


----------



## ClieOS

mrnikt said:


> Thanks
> Did you use it as a USB DAC ? I read it works only 44,1 kHz / 16 bit ?



Tried it a few time, but mostly just for testing purpose.

Only BTR5 can go up to 24 bits because it has an extra XMOS controller. All other BT adapters that rely sorely on CSR8675's internal USB controller function is limited to 16 bits due to the limitation of the chip itself.


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

mrnikt said:


> Another question to HiBy W3 users, who own it for quite a long time.
> Do you have any comments on the construction of the device. I found the opinion of a user from Russia who complained about the poor attachment of the headphone jack socket to the circuit board. In his case, the socket detached from the board in a way that prevents re-soldering.
> Maybe it's isolated case...but I want to ask you all



Mine too have been very smooth so far. No issues encountered and they're very reliable as well.


----------



## Mnie88

mrnikt said:


> Another question to HiBy W3 users, who own it for quite a long time.
> Do you have any comments on the construction of the device. I found the opinion of a user from Russia who complained about the poor attachment of the headphone jack socket to the circuit board. In his case, the socket detached from the board in a way that prevents re-soldering.
> Maybe it's isolated case...but I want to ask you all



Hello, I have not had any problems with the quality of the socket, but I did have a faulty battery in the first i got. Could not get it to work, and charging it only resultated in a really hot blinking device.
Other then a potentially dangerous battery situation, the function (sound) of the device is really good.


----------



## greyforest

some update thought regarding 1795

the device shuntdown at least 6 times during playback for no reason, seems every time when it occurs the device is quite hot. Also the device would reconnect to the phone serval times during the playback. It dose not stop the music but you can hear the machine’s hard coded melody when the device is connected to something. It also took 4 hours to get fully charged, same as the time it can function with out power off. 

Usb dac mode is unstable (dropout) because the usb interface is inferior than any dedicated usb dac. Some people consider ifi xdsd,but i would not recommend this product as well. It have a very mediocre dac, although the amp is independent and somewhat decent. 

Sound quality wise it dose not handle symphony well , very chaotic + distortion, i blame the outdated dac for that. 

Final verdict avoid this product for you own good. Get m11pro or something like that if you planning spending more that 200$ on something that makes sound. Or get es100 and just be happy about the quality of sound that you can have for such little money.


----------



## ClieOS

Even an outdated DAC chip should still going to have measurable performance that is well below human hearing threshold. If you can really hear distortion, I suspect it is not from the DAC chip itself but a much larger problem.


----------



## greyforest

ClieOS said:


> Even an outdated DAC chip should still going to have measurable performance that is well below human hearing threshold. If you can really hear distortion, I suspect it is not from the DAC chip itself but a much larger problem.


sorry i should be more clear, 1795 have an outdated dac and only one of it. Therefore I suspect it is the reason  result  in poor performance with symphonic music with larger dynamics and complicated signals. The distortion is easy to understand, the amp built in the 1795 it just don’t have sufficient power to drive my iem.


----------



## DanWiggins

ClieOS said:


> Even an outdated DAC chip should still going to have measurable performance that is well below human hearing threshold. If you can really hear distortion, I suspect it is not from the DAC chip itself but a much larger problem.


I back this 100%.  RARELY is a DAC going to cause an audible issue unless the filter coefficients are really screwed up (which only happens if the manufacturer loads their own coefficients and is very bad and designing them).  If there is distortion issues, it's not the DAC - it's the amp, not the DAC.  Lots of amps are pretty poor in terms of their ability to drive complex loads.  Especially those built-in to DACs.  They tend to use localized charge pumps with low current capacity, and can even lead to power supply pumping on the entire device.

If you have an external DAC you use, make sure it has a quality amplifier built in, if at all possible.


----------



## ballog

I am currently using my Hidizs AP80 as bluetooth adapter over LDAC. Does anyone here have a first hand experience of the BTR5 sound quality (in single ended) vs the AP80? Perhaps someone who has both could post a brief impression.


----------



## Infoseeker (Jan 31, 2020)

Silly comment. But this indiegogo campaign is technically a Bluetooth transceiver + amp (115mw @16 Ohms). Has Aptx-LL

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/...paign=bck-01312020friday&gs_variant=control#/

*STRAP EDGE*

Transducers


Transducer frequency response: 1-200Hz
Audio


Texas Instruments built-in analog headphones amplifier
105mW output into 16ohm headphones
3.5mm stereo headphones out
Support TRRS (mic) headphones connector
0.1% THD+N headphone output
Connectivity


CSR APTX Low-latency Bluetooth 5.0 connectivity
3.5mm stereo line-in, supporting TRRS input (mic)
USB-C audio-in 
BLE for future firmware updates
Power 


Charging time: approximately 3 hours
USB-C charging port
Up to 8 hours playtime, depending on usage and volume/sensation level.
Auto power off
Control


Built-in independent headphones & sensation volume control 
2x LED indicators


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Infoseeker said:


> Silly comment. But this indiegogo campaign is technically a Bluetooth transceiver + amp (115mw @16 Ohms). Has Aptx-LL
> 
> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/...paign=bck-01312020friday&gs_variant=control#/
> 
> ...


Oh my. Thanks for pointing it out, that was priceless. aptX LL is not an HD codec, so technically out of the scope of this thread, but with a thing like that who’s keeping score? The marketing speak is either smartly disingenuous or downright dumb, I love how they start from the assumption that all headphones are basically the same - silly old things you put on your head, as opposed to this new device that just _shocks_ you with music.

The so-called haptic feedback on the Nuraphone was so tacky, just vibration supposed to imitate the feeling of a live performance? Whatever. The fact they ditched that wholesale is one of the reasons I chipped in to get the Nuraloop. Less really is more sometimes...


----------



## sinquito

What about aptx LL? The bluetooth codec is actually not that important, but the implementation... See ClieOS' comment about the SBC codec on the MW1.


----------



## ClieOS

Aptx LL is optimized only for the lowest possible lantency, which ends up also results in very poor sound quality in general as it uses very low bandwidth and compression rate.


----------



## FinBenton (Feb 1, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Aptx LL is optimized only for the lowest possible lantency, which ends up also results in very poor sound quality in general as it uses very low bandwidth and compression rate.


I know it is supposed to be lower quality but I have a switch on my transmitter to change between HD and LL, with quick switching in between I dont really notice the difference in quality with Sundaras and 58X, I mainly leave it for LL for daily use, sometimes HD for music, for my ears the difference is quite small.


----------



## Saltjo

With the es100 I had the problem that every contact with the device was transmitted to the headphones. This did not happen with the FiiO btr3. How did you experience the w3 regarding this?


----------



## ClieOS

Saltjo said:


> With the es100 I had the problem that every contact with the device was transmitted to the headphones. This did not happen with the FiiO btr3. How did you experience the w3 regarding this?



What so you mean by 'every contact with the device was transmitted to the headphones'? Like touching the ES100 itself makes a sound that physically transmits to the headphone, like a cable noise / occlusion effect on IEM? Or do you means touching the ES100 creates an electronic interference on the headphone?


----------



## Saltjo (Feb 7, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> What so you mean by 'every contact with the device was transmitted to the headphones'? Like touching the ES100 itself makes a sound that physically transmits to the headphone, like a cable noise / occlusion effect on IEM? Or do you means touching the ES100 creates an electronic interference on the headphone?



It physically transmits to the headphone. Probably like cable noise. But it was the device itself.


----------



## ClieOS

Saltjo said:


> It physically transmits to the headphone. Probably like cable noise. But it was the device itself.



Can't say I notice any occlusion effect on W3. Then again, I didn't notice it on ES100 either. This will mostly have to do with how you are wearing the adapter and the headphone. You need to 'ground' the cable to stop it from transmitting the noise, which means clipping it to your clothes.


----------



## Saltjo

ClieOS said:


> Can't say I notice any occlusion effect on W3. Then again, I didn't notice it on ES100 either. This will mostly have to do with how you are wearing the adapter and the headphone. You need to 'ground' the cable to stop it from transmitting the noise, which means clipping it to your clothes.



Every time I touched the housing itself I could hear it on the headphone, irrespective of the headphones. The same headphones did have nothing similar with the FiiO btr3, so I guess it should be independent of the cables. Maybe the es100 was faulty. I sent it back as it really was annoying.


----------



## ClieOS

Saltjo said:


> Every time I touched the housing itself I could hear it on the headphone, irrespective of the headphones. The same headphones did have nothing similar with the FiiO btr3, so I guess it should be independent of the cables. Maybe the es100 was faulty. I sent it back as it really was annoying.



That's pretty weird, seems to me it is likely the ES100 as well.


----------



## indrakula

I have just received Oriolus 1795 and it was a bad decision to buy, BT connection was not stable being BT5.0 that really sucks and also the background noice in IEMs. I have decided to return.


----------



## ceeloChamp

Hello all, I am looking for somthing that may not exist. I want to get a desktop Bluetooth transmitter/receiver that can power most headphones decently well that has both wired and Bluetooth outputs.

I am hoping to connect it to my Piano via aux out (from the piano) then I want it to be flexible enough to handle both a wired output or a Bluetooth. Sometimes I want to be able to wirelessly connect Bluetooth headphones to it and sometimes I want to be able to connect wired headphones to it.

I may also want to listen to music from it so I want it to have decent sound quality, but it doesn’t have to be As good as my Hugo 2


----------



## ClieOS (Feb 21, 2020)

ceeloChamp said:


> Hello all, I am looking for somthing that may not exist....



You are right - it does not exist.

However, a FiiO DAP, when used as a desktop DAC/amp, can do most of what you are looking for.


----------



## ceeloChamp

ClieOS said:


> You are right - it does not exist.
> 
> However, a FiiO DAP, when used as a desktop DAC/amp, can do most of what you are looking for.



thank you! I could also make a stack, with a Bluetooth receiver on top of an amp and DAC...that way I can use the receiver when I want to go wireless and the Regular amp/DAC for the wired connection.

Do you have a recommendation for reciever that can connect to Bluetooth headphones?


----------



## ClieOS

ceeloChamp said:


> thank you! I could also make a stack, with a Bluetooth receiver on top of an amp and DAC...that way I can use the receiver when I want to go wireless and the Regular amp/DAC for the wired connection.
> 
> Do you have a recommendation for reciever that can connect to Bluetooth headphones?



What you are looking for is not a receiver, but a transmitter. Unfortunately there just isn't any particularly good BT transmitter around. Most that I have seen are really designed for adding Bluetooth capability to TV, and limited to aptX or aptX-HD. There is really nothing on LDAC transmitter that I know of.

Amp/DAC with BT receiver on the other hand are easy to find.


----------



## ceeloChamp

ClieOS said:


> What you are looking for is not a receiver, but a transmitter. Unfortunately there just isn't any particularly good BT transmitter around. Most that I have seen are really designed for adding Bluetooth capability to TV, and limited to aptX or aptX-HD. There is really nothing on LDAC transmitter that I know of.
> 
> Amp/DAC with BT receiver on the other hand are easy to find.



does the Chord 2go/2yu combo or the hugo2/2go combo support Bluetooth streaming to wireless headphones?


----------



## rkw

ClieOS said:


> What you are looking for is not a receiver, but a transmitter. Unfortunately there just isn't any particularly good BT transmitter around. Most that I have seen are really designed for adding Bluetooth capability to TV, and limited to aptX or aptX-HD. There is really nothing on LDAC transmitter that I know of.


There are LDAC transmitters now:
https://moisescardona.me/hidizs-ap80-usb-ldac-bluetooth-transmitter/
Shanling M0, M2X, M5S


----------



## ClieOS

ceeloChamp said:


> does the Chord 2go/2yu combo or the hugo2/2go combo support Bluetooth streaming to wireless headphones?



Not that I know of. 2Go can be used as BT receiver, not transmitter.



rkw said:


> There are LDAC transmitters now:
> https://moisescardona.me/hidizs-ap80-usb-ldac-bluetooth-transmitter/
> Shanling M0, M2X, M5S



Already suggested DAP as possible solution on My previous reply.


----------



## ceeloChamp

Thanks for the tips, I’m going to try 2 RCA-to-1/4inch cables from the piano to my Schiit Asgard, then connect that to my DX200 which has Bluetooth. Hopefully that does it. Unfortunately the only output from the piano is RCA-to-1/4


----------



## ClieOS

ceeloChamp said:


> Thanks for the tips, I’m going to try 2 RCA-to-1/4inch cables from the piano to my Schiit Asgard, then connect that to my DX200 which has Bluetooth. Hopefully that does it. Unfortunately the only output from the piano is RCA-to-1/4


Don't own a DX200 so I can't say for sure. However, having BT doesn't means it will act as a BT transmitter in the way you wanted.


----------



## ceeloChamp

ClieOS said:


> Don't own a DX200 so I can't say for sure. However, having BT doesn't means it will act as a BT transmitter in the way you wanted.



It can connect to Bluetooth headphones, just tested, so if it gets a signal from an amp it may work, will let you know


----------



## ClieOS

ceeloChamp said:


> It can connect to Bluetooth headphones, just tested, so if it gets a signal from an amp it may work, will let you know



The problem isn't connecting headphone to DX200, but Schiit Asgard or even just the piano to DX200. It will required DX200 having an ADC (Analog-to-Digital Converter) section, which I don't think it does. Basically a TV-to-Bluetooth transmitter will work for you, something like this: https://avantree.com/sg/oasis-plus-bluetooth-transmitter-receiver


----------



## ClieOS

List updated with FiiO BTR3K


----------



## ballog

ClieOS said:


> List updated with FiiO BTR3K


@ClieOS bro i don't know if you could help. I somehow can't pair My AP80 to my Fiio Q5s. Intermitently they do pair if i try multiple times but most of time its a no go. These two devices seem mutually exclusive since they always work with other devices. I beleive as reported on other threads no one has been able to make the AP80 work with the Q5s. Such a shame since i got the Q5s to pair with the AP80 on LDAC. Hope you might have an explanation.


----------



## ClieOS

ballog said:


> @ClieOS bro i don't know if you could help. I somehow can't pair My AP80 to my Fiio Q5s. Intermitently they do pair if i try multiple times but most of time its a no go. These two devices seem mutually exclusive since they always work with other devices. I beleive as reported on other threads no one has been able to make the AP80 work with the Q5s. Such a shame since i got the Q5s to pair with the AP80 on LDAC. Hope you might have an explanation.



I have no experience with the Hidizs to really tell what could be the problem - but it is more likely a BT source issue rather than a BT receiver issue so there could be something wrong inside AP80's OS


----------



## behemothkat

Being in discussion with Oriolus representative about some support topic I did ask to share with me a user manual for 1795.
You may add to your description that it has mic with CVC noise cancellation.


----------



## Shanling (Mar 27, 2020)

Companion app for Shanling UP2 & UP4 is now available: http://en.shanling.com/article-CompanionApp.html


----------



## ClieOS

Shanling said:


> Companion app for Shanling UP2 & UP4 is now available: http://en.shanling.com/article-CompanionApp.html



Tried. 

First thing to note is that I can only connect it with UP4, but not UP2 (even though UP2 works just fine). It keeps saying connection time-out. UP4 works fine with the app but it doesn't really add much function except for EQ, which I can't use as I am on LDAC.

Second to note is that the app can't exit normally (*it will stay on the notification area) and require force stop.

Overall a good try, but it need more polishing.


----------



## Shanling

Strange that you are having issue with connecting two device, I have both UP2 and UP4 connected on my phone.

Does both of them show up in the app(Under Bluetooth device control tab)? If so, can you try to delete the UP2(swipe left on it) and connect it again?
If you tried fresh install of the app, can be UP2 paired as a first device?

And exiting app, it was already reported to the app team.


----------



## ClieOS

Shanling said:


> Strange that you are having issue with connecting two device, I have both UP2 and UP4 connected on my phone.
> 
> Does both of them show up in the app(Under Bluetooth device control tab)? If so, can you try to delete the UP2(swipe left on it) and connect it again?
> If you tried fresh install of the app, can be UP2 paired as a first device?
> ...



I figured out why - I accidentally disable UP2's phone call ability in its Bluetooth profile (*I only used it for music so I didn't notice it was disabled) and that's the reason why the app can't detect UP2. Once I have it enabled again, the app connects to it without any problem.


----------



## Shanling

ClieOS said:


> I figured out why - I accidentally disable UP2's phone call ability in its Bluetooth profile (*I only used it for music so I didn't notice it was disabled) and that's the reason why the app can't detect UP2. Once I have it enabled again, the app connects to it without any problem.



Thanks, will keep this in mind if anybody else will have similar problem!


----------



## ClieOS

For those who are using the beta version of FiiO Control app, please note that the official version has made it to the Play Store.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.fiio.control

Go to the link above, uninstall the beta and reinstall it from Play Store. It will works with the new BTR3K as well (which the beta version won't).


----------



## ClieOS

Received BTR3K a few days ago and has been testing it, so far I am impressed. Full impression will be updated soonish but it warrants a preview: 3.5mm output is better than that of ES100 while 2.5mm output is just as good sounding. Taking away that FiiO still hasn't figured out how to implement EQ over LDAC - BTR3K is getting ES100 a good run for its money.


----------



## episiarch

How do you feel about it vs. Hiby W3?


----------



## ClieOS

episiarch said:


> How do you feel about it vs. Hiby W3?



W3 makes for a better buy because it is substantially cheaper. But as far as SQ goes, BTR3K wins hands down.


----------



## Lidson Mendes Br (Apr 14, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Received BTR3K a few days ago and has been testing it, so far I am impressed. Full impression will be updated soonish but it warrants a preview: 3.5mm output is better than that of ES100 while 2.5mm output is just as good sounding. Taking away that FiiO still hasn't figured out how to implement EQ over LDAC - BTR3K is getting ES100 a good run for its money.



I ended up buying Shanling Up2, I received a discount and the price difference of BRT 5 was very big. I didn't think the BRT 3k had such a good 3.5mm output. I hope I don't regret it.


----------



## ClieOS

Lidson Mendes Br said:


> ...I hope you don't regret it.



Don't think I will.


----------



## Lidson Mendes Br (Apr 14, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Don't think I will.



Sorry friend, my bad english. I exchanged a few words.

I hope I don't regret buying the Shanling UP2.


----------



## ClieOS

Lidson Mendes Br said:


> Sorry friend, my bad english. I exchanged a few words.
> 
> I hope I don't regret buying the Shanling UP2.



UP2 is still a solid performer, and all the better if you can get it cheap.


----------



## Synthy

so i was using a pretty good usb-c dongle (meizu pro) to get better sound out of my laptop and phone (the laptop really needed it). the usb-c port on my phone is now too flaky to use dac/amp dongles (though i'm still ok, the 3.5mm jack is pretty good). i was looking at bluetooth receivers that also work over usb for when i'm on my laptop as i like having a single source portable and at the desk. has anyone used the meizu hifi pro and the btr5/btr3k? i'm trying to figure out if it's a real upgrade and if i would notice it.


----------



## ClieOS

Size comparison: BTR5 vs. BTR3K


----------



## ClieOS

FiiO BTR3K impression updated on post #2.


----------



## rstarden

ClieOS said:


> FiiO BTR3K impression updated on post #2.



Curious - anyone with low impedance CIEMs (e.g., Andromedas) tried MMCX BT option they like more than Shure BT2s? When I upgraded from my 64audios, I tried a bunch of old dongles and the hiss was unbearable. Love to see if people are happy with any unit for this specific setup.


----------



## ClieOS

rstarden said:


> Curious - anyone with low impedance CIEMs (e.g., Andromedas) tried MMCX BT option they like more than Shure BT2s? When I upgraded from my 64audios, I tried a bunch of old dongles and the hiss was unbearable. Love to see if people are happy with any unit for this specific setup.


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-tws-neckband-bt-cable-adapter-thread.920709/


----------



## rstarden

Perfect, many thanks for pointing me here. This confirms Fostex is dead end for my CA Solstices. I probably owe a couple reviews in that thread...


----------



## waynes world (Apr 28, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> *BTR5* ... The single-ended 3.5mm is however a little bland sounding - not bad per se and definitely better than BTR3, there is however nothing truly remarkable to speak of. For those who only intended to use the 3.5mm output for music listening, BTR5 might not be the best choice value wise.



Hi ClieOS. I just spontaneously ordered the BTR5. Of course, it's possible that I didn't do the appropriate research _before_ ordering lol (wouldn't be the first time!).

I've was using the ES100 (before it broke), and more recently the Ubtr to get me by (I couldn't wait for the 5K any longer).

Although I do have some balanced headphones and earbuds, most are single sided, and I do tend to listen quite a lot to my single sided gear, so what you said above has me wondering!

To get a feel for how the BTR5 sounds single sided, how would you say it compares to the ES100 single sided?

Reading through your initial posts again, you've got me intrigued with the HiBy W3. How does the BTR5 single sided sound compared to it?

Thanks!

p.s. my apologies if you have answered these questions in here already.

Edit: I just ready your BTR3K impressions. It seems like that maybe should have been the one for me taking into consideration price, size, 3.5mm sound quality etc. Hmm!


----------



## ClieOS

waynes world said:


> Hi ClieOS. I just spontaneously ordered the BTR5. Of course, it's possible that I didn't do the appropriate research _before_ ordering lol (wouldn't be the first time!).
> 
> I've was using the ES100 (before it broke), and more recently the Ubtr to get me by (I couldn't wait for the 5K any longer).
> 
> ...



BTR5's 3.5mm is about the same level as W3 / UP2. I'll say ES100's 3.5mm is slightly better, noticeable (especially in 2X current mode) but not in any night and day difference. Just to be clear - BTR5's 3.5mm doesn't sound bad, but it is not on the same level as its 2.5mm and more comparable to those in the sub-$100 region - which of course is  somewhat of a disappointment when it is supposed to be the best (and certainly the most expensive at its launch) of all the BT adapter out there.


----------



## waynes world

ClieOS said:


> BTR5's 3.5mm is about the same level as W3 / UP2. I'll say ES100's 3.5mm is slightly better, noticeable (especially in 2X current mode) but not in any night and day difference. Just to be clear - BTR5's 3.5mm doesn't sound bad, but it is not on the same level as its 2.5mm and more comparable to those in the sub-$100 region - which of course is  somewhat of a disappointment when it is supposed to be the best (and certainly the most expensive at its launch) of all the BT adapter out there.



Thank you. You also said this about the BTR3K:



ClieOS said:


> Received BTR3K a few days ago and has been testing it, so far I am impressed. Full impression will be updated soonish but it warrants a preview: 3.5mm output is better than that of ES100 while 2.5mm output is just as good sounding. Taking away that FiiO still hasn't figured out how to implement EQ over LDAC - BTR3K is getting ES100 a good run for its money.



and this:



> Max power output on the balanced 2.5mm is comparable to, if not just slightly higher than ES100 2.5mm (1x voltage). Max power on 3.5mm is about half of 2.5mm, but it should be more than loud enough for your average headphone. Both BTR3K and ES100 use (*different) AKM DAC/amp codec chips in dual configuration, so overall sound signature is fairly similar. On 2.5mm output, the difference is subtle and hard to say which is better. On the 3.5mm however, BTR3K offers better sound with bigger image / soundstage and grander presentation. In short, ES100 will be able to go louder - but for the same volume, BTR3K sounds at least as good (on 2.5mm) if not better (on 3.5mm).



That's all I need to hear. I just ordered the BTR3K and will return the BTR5 unopened when I get it.

Thanks for your insights!


----------



## waynes world

waynes world said:


> That's all I need to hear. I just ordered the BTR3K and will return the BTR5 unopened when I get it.



My BTR3K just shipped. This makes me happy. It's from a Canadian store so hopefully it won't take too long to get here.

For my own edification, these are the reasons why I am excited about the BTR3K:
- great price. $100CAD is approx $70US. Can't beat that.
- great 3.5 mm sound quality (I mainly listen to single ended gear).
- great 2.5 mm sound quality (I am listening to more balanced gear as time goes by)
- nice build quality, and buttons seem more pronounced than other models I'm used to (I'm looking at you, ES100)
- small size and light
- clip case. that's great. If the clip breaks - which it will do for me - I can just buy another clip case rather than gluing a clip onto the unit lol
- battery life of 11 hours (compared to 9 hour battery life of the btr5)

I really don't need the extra power or the other bells and whistles that the BTR5 provides, so the BTR3K is a no brainer for me.

Thanks again ClieOS


----------



## casenote22

Hello all. I recently purchased a BTR5 and I’m awaiting it’s arrival. I’m curious about its “car mode” and what connection cables I’ll need. I’d like to use it wired in the car on my phone with no Bluetooth so I figure I connect it in the car through a USB C to USB C cable phone to BTR5 then an aux cable from the 2.5mm jack on the BTR to the aux receiver in my truck. My truck has usb C ports as well, would that be better quality to use those instead?  I’m kinda confused, definitely looking for some guidance. Thanks in advance for your time!


----------



## ClieOS

casenote22 said:


> Hello all. I recently purchased a BTR5 and I’m awaiting it’s arrival. I’m curious about its “car mode” and what connection cables I’ll need. I’d like to use it wired in the car on my phone with no Bluetooth so I figure I connect it in the car through a USB C to USB C cable phone to BTR5 then an aux cable from the 2.5mm jack on the BTR to the aux receiver in my truck. My truck has usb C ports as well, would that be better quality to use those instead?  I’m kinda confused, definitely looking for some guidance. Thanks in advance for your time!



First of, any decent USB cable should do. However, if you find that BTR5 becomes somewhat distorted / hissy when connected to the car, then your car USB port might not be properly grounded. FiiO actually sells a charging cable that deals with that issue.

Secondly, *DO NOT* connect your car AUX to BTR5's 2.5mm balanced output. Balanced output can only be used with balanced headphones or balanced amp. Otherwise you run the risk of destroying your BTR5.


----------



## casenote22 (May 4, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> First of, any decent USB cable should do. However, if you find that BTR5 becomes somewhat distorted / hissy when connected to the car, then your car USB port might not be properly grounded. FiiO actually sells a charging cable that deals with that issue.
> 
> Secondly, *DO NOT* connect your car AUX to BTR5's 2.5mm balanced output. Balanced output can only be used with balanced headphones or balanced amp. Otherwise you run the risk of destroying your BTR5.


Okay so if I’m understanding correctly, USB C from car to usb c on the BTR5 is fine?  Then after connecting those two then connect another wire which would be 3.5 coming from the btr to my phone?  I’m sorry for all the questions thanks for the reply

edit. My main goal is a wired connection in my car


----------



## ClieOS

casenote22 said:


> Okay so if I’m understanding correctly, USB C from car to usb c on the BTR5 is fine?  Then after connecting those two then connect another wire which would be 3.5 coming from the btr to my phone?  I’m sorry for all the questions thanks for the reply
> 
> edit. My main goal is a wired connection in my car



Yes, Type-C to Type-C connection is fine. If the Type-C output on your car is clean, then you won't notice anything. But if you notice hissing / distortion on BTR5's output, then there is a chance the Type-C output on your car is not clean, which mean you need USB power isolater / reconditioner However, you won't know till you plug your BTR5 into the car.

BTR5's 3.5mm to your car's AUX is fine as well. Setting BTR5 into car mode means BTR5 will power-up automatically when it senses the USB port that it connected to has power (which usually means you have just started up your car, as most USB ports car only power up when the car engine is running). It also automatically turn itself off when it senses no power from the USB port. So basically it turns itself into kinda a dedicated Bluetooth dongle for your car's audio system.


----------



## casenote22

ClieOS said:


> Yes, Type-C to Type-C connection is fine. If the Type-C output on your car is clean, then you won't notice anything. But if you notice hissing / distortion on BTR5's output, then there is a chance the Type-C output on your car is not clean, which mean you need USB power isolater / reconditioner However, you won't know till you plug your BTR5 into the car.
> 
> BTR5's 3.5mm to your car's AUX is fine as well. Setting BTR5 into car mode means BTR5 will power-up automatically when it senses the USB port that it connected to has power (which usually means you have just started up your car, as most USB ports car only power up when the car engine is running). It also automatically turn itself off when it senses no power from the USB port. So basically it turns itself into kinda a dedicated Bluetooth dongle for your car's audio system.


Okay so it sounds like no matter what I will be playing music through a Bluetooth signal in my truck?  No way to hard wire everything so I am not using Bluetooth at all?


----------



## ClieOS (May 4, 2020)

casenote22 said:


> Okay so it sounds like no matter what I will be playing music through a Bluetooth signal in my truck?  No way to hard wire everything so I am not using Bluetooth at all?



Wait, so you want to play music from your smartphone to your car's audio directly without any Bluetooth connection in between? If that's the case, you are looking at the wrong product. BTR5 is a Bluetooth adapter, not a Digital Audio Player (DAP) like iPod. It doesn't have any internal memory to hold music inside and thus music must come from your smartphone (which will be BT in this case, as USB DAC can't be used when the port is needed for car mode charging).

If you want a simple DAP, get the FiiO M5 instead. Some DAP do offer car mode as well, though I don't keep track of which is which.


----------



## IEManiac (May 5, 2020)

Very happy with my Fiio BTR5.






Nitpicks

It doesn't wake up the phone when plugged in via USB and I turn it on. The Topping NX4 DSD and Oppo HA-2 do.
Switch to 96kHz and 24bit and it doesn't automatically recognize the switch. Have to close and open UAPP. The Topping NX4 DSD and Oppo HA-2 do.
It should come with a short USB C to C cable in the box.
Wish it were a little smaller and lighter.
Top button could be bigger with more travel


----------



## benandfaith (May 5, 2020)

I apologise if this has been asked many times before. I've tried to google search 'what benefits would I get with Bluetooth dac/amp over phone' and couldn't find a good answer.

Some info:
I'm just getting back into listening to music (predominantly mainstream pop, movie/tv soundtracks, and especially Korean Drama OSTs via Spotify Premium). For the past few years, I've been listening through the phone (Galaxy S9+/S10+) using my Galaxy Buds and then more recently with Soundcore Liberty 2 Pro.

I've recently dusted off my budget IEMs KZ ZS3 and Havi B3 pro (which I haven't touched for a few years) and just purchased Blon BL-03 (awaiting delivery). I've also got the Audio Technica ATH-AD900x headphones (which I don't particularly like - too little bass).

At the desktop, I'm using the Fiio E07K to drive the headphones/IEMs.

I am considering getting the Fiio BTR3K for portable use connected via bluetooth to my S10+. Will there be any noticeable benefit to having the BTR3K over just my S10+ driving my iems? I know one benefit is being able to be more 'mobile', which I would like. But my main consideration is improved sound quality. What I most love about music is clear airy vocals, instrument separation and sound stage. As long as there will be 'noticeable' improvement, I'll be keen for the upgrade/purchase. (I know 'noticeable' is very subjective!)

Any advice/help would be much appreciated!

Edit: One more question to throw out there... S10+/BTR3K/wired IEM (Bl-03/ZS3) vs S10+/bluetooth IEM (Galaxy buds/L2P) - which will give better sound?


----------



## rkw

casenote22 said:


> Okay so it sounds like no matter what I will be playing music through a Bluetooth signal in my truck?  No way to hard wire everything so I am not using Bluetooth at all?


Please clarify what you are trying to accomplish. I concluded that you want to play music from your phone on your car stereo system, and your phone doesn't have a headphone jack. Are you trying to play from music files stored on the phone, or from a streaming service such as Spotify? For playing stored music files, the solution might be as simple as connecting a USB cable between your truck and phone, and the stereo system would directly read the music files on the phone. Alternatively, copy the music files onto a USB flash drive, and plug it into your truck's USB.

If you are playing music from other sources such as a streaming service, personally I would just Bluetooth from the phone to the car stereo. Is there a reason you want to avoid Bluetooth?


----------



## IEManiac (May 5, 2020)

C_Lindbergh said:


> Is there any BT receiver with QI wireless charging? It's strange that it isn't more common, after all BT audio is mostly about convenience, and wireless charging convenience defined.


Wireless charging is slow(er) so in that respect it is inconvenient.

Most convenient? Not having to charge it at all. As when it draws power from the source device which carries a much, much bigger battery, 5000mAh in my case.


----------



## thekenta (May 6, 2020)

Can some of you guys perhaps help me out?

It has finally come to it: Had to upgrade my phone, of course no headphone jack.
Had the BTR5 on my list, but now came across a video on Youtube basically saying it's sounding bad and the UP4 is the superior device.
Now I don't know how credible this guy is since he might be a click bait contrarian in order to get some views, but the release of the BTR3K didn't help in making a choice either.

Here in Europe I'd pay around 63€ for the BTR3K and 90€ for the BTR5. Shanling is out of contention since they're more expensive to import.
Money isn't really the issue, but I'll be mainly using the 3.5 Jack since I don't own balanced cables for my main IEMs.
I'll also be using the device as a DAC when I'm on travels since my laptop has a really bad sound output (thanks, Lenovo).

What kind of device would you say makes more sense to purchase? Since I saw ClieOS BTR3K write up, I think this might be the right device for me, but the DAC in the BTR5 sounds more appealing (on paper at least).


----------



## IEManiac

The BTR5 sounds very good.


----------



## ClieOS

thekenta said:


> Can some of you guys perhaps help me out?
> 
> It has finally come to it: Had to upgrade my phone, of course no headphone jack.
> Had the BTR5 on my list, but now came across a video on Youtube basically saying it's sounding bad and the UP4 is the superior device.
> ...



If you need the extra power and better USB DAC function (*namely for Hi-res and DSD), then BTR5 makes more sense. If you prefer portability / simplicity and a higher value factor, then BTR3K makes better sense.

UP4 has its own issues, which I have discussed. It won't be a completely bad buy if it is the only BT adapter of its kind at its price range. The problem is that there are noticeably better options for the same (or less) money that have none of those issues. The important point about any review is of course that you have no idea the quality of the reviewer and thus you don't know how reliable and relatable his/her particular review is going to be after you factor in personal taste / bias. This is where measurement can be helpful on making sure that the gear in question will at least objectively be issue-free on the basics..


----------



## jsmiller58

thekenta said:


> Can some of you guys perhaps help me out?
> 
> It has finally come to it: Had to upgrade my phone, of course no headphone jack.
> Had the BTR5 on my list, but now came across a video on Youtube basically saying it's sounding bad and the UP4 is the superior device.
> ...


The BTR5 is very versatile - good sounding via BT (I exclusively use LDAC), good power to even drive reasonable headphones, and a competent USB DAC/Amp.  If you think you can make use of all that, then the BTR5 is a great option.  

If just for BT for IEMs I don’t know if it is worth paying much of a premium... I have several BT adapters (BTR5, W5, W3, es100) and honestly with IEMs they are pretty much alike from sound quality.  The es100 has a built in EQ function that some people really value, but I never use it.


----------



## Synthy

ClieOS said:


> This is where measurement can be helpful on making sure that the gear in question will at least objectively be issue-free on the basics..


i've been looking around, does any reviewer do measurements for bluetooth receivers/adapters? i haven't been able to find any.


----------



## benandfaith

Considering entering into world of bluetooth dac/amp.

Is there a sound quality improvement using my sub-$50 chifi IEMs with BTR3K versus plugging IEM directly into my smartphone (S10+ Exynos)?


----------



## IEManiac

benandfaith said:


> Considering entering into world of bluetooth dac/amp.
> 
> Is there a sound quality improvement using my sub-$50 chifi IEMs with BTR3K versus plugging IEM directly into my smartphone (S10+ Exynos)?


Reportedly S10+ headphone jack output is pretty good. I'd spend the money on a nice IEM instead.


----------



## ClieOS

Synthy said:


> i've been looking around, does any reviewer do measurements for bluetooth receivers/adapters? i haven't been able to find any.



Not that I know of, at least not in any extensive way that worth a reading. The problem only gets worst with too many casual Youtube reviewers all trying to get a piece of the action but often only coming up short on technical aspects. I do basic measurement on what I do own, but I don't post them unless there is issue worth talking about.


----------



## ClieOS

IEManiac said:


> Reportedly S10+ headphone jack output is pretty good. I'd spend the money on a nice IEM instead.



There are plenty of reason why smartphone makes a bad source for IEM, and many of them are not in plain sight. For example, many smartphone has really high output impedance (*Apple generally is pretty good on keep it low, but still in the 10 ohm or less range. Many Android smartphones have output impedance on the 50 ohm range, if not more), which ends up messing with the cross-over inside the IEM and makes it sounds different than what it would have normally sounded like. Most smartphone also has poor output power, which meant you will never get as good a sound you should get with a decent source. Of course, some (and often really expensive and good sounding) IEM have extremely low impedance also worsen the problem.

Of course, it also depends largely on what level of 'good' the listener is willing to settle on. There is an old Chinese saying that roughly means: you will only get mad at yourself once you start to compare yourself to everyone else.


----------



## benandfaith

ClieOS said:


> There are plenty of reason why smartphone makes a bad source for IEM, and many of them are not in plain sight. For example, many smartphone has really high output impedance (*Apple generally is pretty good on keep it low, but still in the 10 ohm or less range. Many Android smartphones have output impedance on the 50 ohm range, if not more), which ends up messing with the cross-over inside the IEM and makes it sounds different than what it would have normally sounded like. Most smartphone also has poor output power, which meant you will never get as good a sound you should get with a decent source.



So, would bypassing the phone and going with btr3k bring noticeable improvement?


----------



## ClieOS (May 6, 2020)

benandfaith said:


> So, would bypassing the phone and going with btr3k bring noticeable improvement?



My smartphone is a Sony Xperia 5 that doesn't come with a 3.5mm headphone output, I can't answer for a Samsung S10+ unless you want to loan me one to try out. I do have my doubt that any smartphone can have headphone-out as good as BTR3K's.


----------



## IEManiac (May 6, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> There are plenty of reason why smartphone makes a bad source for IEM, and many of them are not in plain sight. For example, many smartphone has really high output impedance (*Apple generally is pretty good on keep it low, but still in the 10 ohm or less range. Many Android smartphones have output impedance on the 50 ohm range, if not more), which ends up messing with the cross-over inside the IEM and makes it sounds different than what it would have normally sounded like. Most smartphone also has poor output power, which meant you will never get as good a sound you should get with a decent source. Of course, some (and often really expensive and good sounding) IEM have extremely low impedance also worsen the problem.
> 
> Of course, it also depends largely on what level of 'good' the listener is willing to settle on. There is an old Chinese saying that roughly means: you will only get mad at yourself once you start to compare yourself to everyone else.


Plenty of smartphones that suffer from none of those problems. You should give a more balanced assessment. He asked specifically about the S10+ and you denounced the entire gamut.

Single-driver IEMs don't have crossovers. In any case, the problem of too high Rout transcends the use of crossovers.

There are reasons to think that a stand alone DAC with measure and sound better than a phone. But it is altogether possible, indeed likely that standalone DACs and phone headphone jacks wiil sound identical, leaving power aside, because their performance is beyond the threshold of human perception.

More nuance and balance is in order here. Particularly since you, we don't have objective indicators in which to make a solid declaration and since decisions based on no objective data are not expenditure neutral. The S10+ otoh does have tests.

No need for smug or veiled contempt with so-called Chinese wisdom. Your ears are no better or worse than anyone else's here.


----------



## ClieOS (May 6, 2020)

IEManiac said:


> Plenty of smartphones that suffer from none of those problems. You should give a more balanced assessment. He asked specifically about the S10+ and you denounced the entire gamut.
> 
> Single-driver IEMs don't have crossovers. In any case, the problem of too high Rout transcends the use of crossovers.
> 
> ...



Please give me examples of plenty of these "no problem" smartphones then. I am merely giving a general assessment of what I have read about on actual measurements on Apple and Samsung smartphones (among others) in the past, many can be found here in the forums older threads, reported by people who bother to actually measured their smartphone headphone-out, not just based on guess work. You don't seem to own a S10+ yourself, so what factual evidence or personal experience you  have to say S10+ is good  besides what you have read somewhere else? Besides, we don't even know which IEM @benandfaith owns to say it must be a single driver. You can find plenty of cheap multi-driver Chi-fi IEM on the market these days. Assuming he will only stick to single driver IEM is unrealistic. Instead of best case scenario, I am more inclined to assume it is likely not and rather give advice that not only works for what he has now, but possibly also for what he will get in the future.


----------



## thekenta

ClieOS said:


> If you need the extra power and better USB DAC function (*namely for Hi-res and DSD), then BTR5 makes more sense. If you prefer portability / simplicity and a higher value factor, then BTR3K makes better sense.





jsmiller58 said:


> If just for BT for IEMs I don’t know if it is worth paying much of a premium... I have several BT adapters (BTR5, W5, W3, es100) and honestly with IEMs they are pretty much alike from sound quality.  The es100 has a built in EQ function that some people really value, but I never use it.



Thanks, guys.
Decided on the BTR3K because of size factor, longer battery life and me probably not using the 2.5mm jack.


----------



## jsmiller58

thekenta said:


> Thanks, guys.
> Decided on the BTR3K because of size factor, longer battery life and me probably not using the 2.5mm jack.


I hope you are thrilled with your choice (and I am sure you will be).  Let us know how it works out for you.


----------



## MewCore

Is anybody else experiencing volume drop by 4db as soon as they enable the EQ in FiiO Control app?


----------



## hkpants

MewCore said:


> Is anybody else experiencing volume drop by 4db as soon as they enable the EQ in FiiO Control app?



EQ functions typically have a negative pre-gain to prevent clipping/distortion.


----------



## jsmiller58

hkpants said:


> EQ functions typically have a negative pre-gain to prevent clipping/distortion.


Exactly.  I saw this specifically called out for the es100, so I assume it would be the same for the FiiO devices.  Volume intentionally dropped to allow for headroom for bands to be increased.


----------



## ClieOS (May 8, 2020)

MewCore said:


> Is anybody else experiencing volume drop by 4db as soon as they enable the EQ in FiiO Control app?



I didn't use EQ with my FiiO BT adapter as it is disabled over LDAC. However, what you have experienced is called reserving headroom. EQ these days is done within the digital domain, as well as volume control - and they are closely matched to the hardware output limitation (*so you will get the best, highest hardware output in normal use). So when EQ is enabled without first reducing a few dB over digital gain, you can actually set the EQ / volume to higher than what the hardware is capable of, and this will result in clipping / distortion. To prevent this, a few dB is automatically preserved when the EQ is enabled, in order to make sure your EQ setting will never go over what the hardware's maximum output limitation. The sign of this type of design is that the volume will drop a few dB when EQ is enabled.

Sometime you don't notice any volume reduction over other gears when enabling the EQ, mainly because: (1) it didn't reserve any headroom but instead allows the hardware to clip / distort, which is the worst way for EQ design in general, or (2) the headroom has been permanently reserved all the time, so the device will never run out of headroom and distort. But on the other hand, it will also never reach the highest possible hardware output and always being handicapped even when EQ is not used.


----------



## MewCore

ClieOS said:


> I didn't use EQ with my FiiO BT adapter as it is disabled over LDAC. However, what you have experienced is called reserving headroom. EQ these days is done within the digital domain, as well as volume control - and they are closely matched to the hardware output limitation (*so you will get the best, highest hardware output in normal use). So when EQ is enabled without first reducing a few dB over digital gain, you can actually set the EQ / volume to higher than what the hardware is capable of, and this will result in clipping. To prevent this, a few dB is preserved when the EQ is enabled, in order to make sure your EQ setting will never go over what the hardware's maximum output limitation.
> 
> Sometime you don't notice any volume reduction over other gears when enabling the EQ, mainly because: (1) it didn't reserve any headroom but instead allows the hardware to clip / distort, which is the worst way for EQ design in general, or (2) the headroom has been permanently reserved all the time, so the device will never run out of headroom and distort. But on the other hand, it will also never reach the highest possible hardware output and always being handicapped even when EQ is not used.


Tnx for the in depth elaboration! 
I just bumped all freq's by 4db, and other even more  Didn't notice any distortion but I guess that's IEM dependent  Maybe I'm even getting distortion but don't know what to listen to ?


----------



## ClieOS

MewCore said:


> Tnx for the in depth elaboration!
> I just bumped all freq's by 4db, and other even more  Didn't notice any distortion but I guess that's IEM dependent  Maybe I'm even getting distortion but don't know what to listen to ?



You didn't notice any distortion over EQ because it shouldn't distort. That means the headroom reservation works as intended.


----------



## Lohb

Late to the party, but finally arrived with BTR5...short impressions to follow on its own, and against E1DA gear.


----------



## nipunsdaddy (May 11, 2020)

*ClieOS *
In my country, the price of BTR5 is  US$110 and BTR3K is US$75.
Which one should I pick for my good old Mi a1 (playing Tidal HIFI through UAAP)?
What do you think of the Price to Performance ratio (at these particular prices)?
I also have Shanling Q1. Is it good enough to be used as Bluetooth DAC compared to these 2s?
Any other advice would be appreciated.


----------



## ClieOS

nipunsdaddy said:


> *ClieOS *
> In my country, the price of BTR5 is  US$110 and BTR3K is US$75.
> Which one should I pick for my good old Mi a1 (playing Tidal HIFI through UAAP)?
> What do you think of the Price to Performance ratio (at these particular prices)?
> ...



Sorry, don't own the Shanling Q1 nor even listened to one before to tell you whether it is good enough or not.

However, if you are not going to be using most of the Bluetooth portion of the adapter but mainly as USB DAC, BTR5 will be the better choice. However, in those case you might want to just get a 'pig-tail' style USB DAC instead. If you are going to be using most Bluetooth but not as much USB DAC, then I do think BTR3K is going to have a better price / performance ration, assuming your headphone is not going to be very difficult to drive.


----------



## KeyStar (May 19, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Short list updated with MSRP and street price.
> 
> Also we got an ETA for FiiO BTR5: July.



I'd like to thank you for the Review on the FiiO BTR3K recieved it today and can only concur what a great Portable  Headphone/DAC it is only after a few hours of play,the apps easy to use and for the money it's fantastic value can only imagine the New BTR5 will be something special.Thank you.👍


----------



## Lohb (May 20, 2020)

One thing I notice is the BTR5's signal appears to break easily compared to even my Aftershokz Air headset...even moving your arm across the line-of-sight can make it choppy for a second or so grabbing a cup of tea etc...maybe as I have BT4 gear transmitting...have to check their specs as I assume BTR5 is BT5....Netflix fireTV 4k dongle 2019, MB Air 2019, Asus phone 2017.
It is suprisingly good wireless and wired, but I do hear a bit of that Sabre brightness and glare that 9018 stuff had..9038 stuff is great in the treble department.
All IMO of course...but even with my 1060c cans which are darker up top, there is a volume ceiling due to the treble magnifying ahead of the rest of the FR or so it seems, after a certain point.
I find that if I try the EQ presets, there is an instant veil and the soundstage comes in..only EQ I have found so far that does not do that is Audeze Reveal.
It will fill a good gap for my netflix dongle and walkabout anyway.

Can anyone hear a difference with the low-pass filters ? Not had enough time to compare..but it seems so slight, on a fast cycle through them if anything...


----------



## dh0licious

I just got my hands on the BTR3k. I noticed in the first post that EQ adjustment is not available on LDAC. Has there been any updates if/when this will ever be available?

I have a Galaxy S10 and I use LDAC on my ES100. Since I want to use EQ on the BTR3k, what is the next best codec for me to use?


----------



## ClieOS

dh0licious said:


> I just got my hands on the BTR3k. I noticed in the first post that EQ adjustment is not available on LDAC. Has there been any updates if/when this will ever be available?
> 
> I have a Galaxy S10 and I use LDAC on my ES100. Since I want to use EQ on the BTR3k, what is the next best codec for me to use?



If you insist on using EQ on BTR3K, then apt-HD. The BT codec will be roughly equally to LDAC 660 ( = standard quality). However, the better way is to use the EQ inside your smartphone / music playing app, then set LDAC to 990 (= SQ preferred) for best of both world.


----------



## dh0licious

ClieOS said:


> If you insist on using EQ on BTR3K, then apt-HD. The BT codec will be roughly equally to LDAC 660 ( = standard quality). However, the better way is to use the EQ inside your smartphone / music playing app, then set LDAC to 990 (= SQ preferred) for best of both world.



No Aptx HD on S10  only AptX


----------



## ClieOS

dh0licious said:


> No Aptx HD on S10  only AptX



 Then better stick to LDAC and use your music app to adjust for EQ.


----------



## jsmiller58 (May 22, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Then better stick to LDAC and use your music app to adjust for EQ.



Instead of a music app’s EQ, there is also the option of Wavelet...

https://www.xda-developers.com/make-your-headphones-sound-better-automatic-eq-wavelet/amp/

edit:  but I think the music apps it supports are limited, at least based on my experience.  Seems to work on Google Music and Youtube, but not on Tidal or Audible...


----------



## monsieurfromag3

jsmiller58 said:


> Instead of a music app’s EQ, there is also the option of Wavelet...
> 
> https://www.xda-developers.com/make-your-headphones-sound-better-automatic-eq-wavelet/amp/


That’s an interesting app, probably the best of those that seek to pull every headphone towards a neutral curve. I’m not really keen on that in principle, as I like gear with personality or color. Hey dev, you want to bring my bass down and mess with my lower treble peak? GTFO!

I have no idea how good the EQ is then within Wavelet, it‘s presented as a bit of a reluctant afterthought to cater to us peasants who enjoy their weird FR curves. It may indeed be better to use a dedicated system-wide equalizer on the emitter side if the aim is to use LDAC.


----------



## dh0licious

jsmiller58 said:


> Instead of a music app’s EQ, there is also the option of Wavelet...
> 
> https://www.xda-developers.com/make-your-headphones-sound-better-automatic-eq-wavelet/amp/
> 
> edit:  but I think the music apps it supports are limited, at least based on my experience.  Seems to work on Google Music and Youtube, but not on Tidal or Audible...



Really cool. Just installed and playing around using my ES100 and BTR3k.

Do I need to open the Wavelet app every time I listen to music on my phone, or will it automatically 'apply' when I start my phone?


----------



## jsmiller58

monsieurfromag3 said:


> That’s an interesting app, probably the best of those that seek to pull every headphone towards a neutral curve. I’m not really keen on that in principle, as I like gear with personality or color. Hey dev, you want to bring my bass down and mess with my lower treble peak? GTFO!
> 
> I have no idea how good the EQ is then within Wavelet, it‘s presented as a bit of a reluctant afterthought to cater to us peasants who enjoy their weird FR curves. It may indeed be better to use a dedicated system-wide equalizer on the emitter side if the aim is to use LDAC.


My ideal would be support on the FiiO, with sufficient customizable presets to let me maintain custom presets for many different IEMs.  Like the es100, but more storage for additional IEMs.


----------



## Kentajalli (May 23, 2020)

*Need Help*
I am in market for a Bluetooth headphone amp up to £200.
All I need is BT and sound quality.
*I do have Chord Mojo,* so my USB or wired requirements are already met.
I recently *returned a Fiio BTR5* because I found the *sound quality not good enough*!
I have two pairs of mid-range IEM's - one being a q-Jays and the other UE700 , they are very similar two driver balanced Armature design.
I am happy with my earphones, they clearly allow me to tell a Mojo from a BTR5.
I have checked the competition to BTR5 but I don't think ES100 and the like, are much better than Fiio, besides I don't even need USB, DSD etc.
What are my alternatives? Help.
Am I in the right thread, do I need to move to another?


----------



## ClieOS

Kentajalli said:


> ..
> Am I in the right thread, do I need to move to another?



I don't know which thread you should move to, but what you want is probably out of the scope of this thread.


----------



## Kentajalli

ClieOS said:


> I don't know which thread you should move to, but what you want is probably out of the scope of this thread.


Let's hope somebody out there can surprise us both.
There must be something, M-DAC nano fits the bill, but I don't know how it sounds, opinions are split.


----------



## jsmiller58

Lohb said:


> Late to the party, but finally arrived with BTR5...short impressions to follow on its own, and against E1DA gear.


Nice!  What case is that?  Looks like one of the Pelican cases...


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Kentajalli said:


> *Need Help*
> I am in market for a Bluetooth headphone amp up to £200.
> All I need is BT and sound quality.
> *I do have Chord Mojo,* so my USB or wired requirements are already met.
> ...


I have the _intuition_ the Qudelix 5K will satisfy, but I haven’t heard the BTR5.


----------



## Q Mass (May 23, 2020)

Kentajalli said:


> *Need Help*
> I am in market for a Bluetooth headphone amp up to £200.
> All I need is BT and sound quality.
> *I do have Chord Mojo,* so my USB or wired requirements are already met.
> ...


Mojo-Poly?
Since you already have the Mojo and enjoy it, wouldn't the Poly BT add-on be a candidate?
(this assumes that I haven't completely misunderstood the function of the Poly, or your needs, both of which are entirely possible).

EDIT:
Ah, I may have misunderstood after all.
I think the Poly might not use BT, but be a streamer with it's own sd card slot, controlled externally via an app.
Any use to you?


----------



## Kentajalli

qdelix is pretty much the same price & size of Fiio BTR5, not to mention uses same chips. Now I am a believer in Fiio, I don't think using same chips and technology and at same price, it would better Fiio by much if any.
Also the Poly was mentioned . it.
 does use BT, but it is much more than that.
Also costs much more than £200 😉.
at £600, for an add-on? I don't think so, not that rich.


----------



## Q Mass

Kentajalli said:


> qdelix is pretty much the same price & size of Fiio BTR5, not to mention uses same chips. Now I am a believer in Fiio, I don't think using same chips and technology and at same price, it would better Fiio by much if any.
> Also the Poly was mentioned . it.
> does use BT, but it is much more than that.
> Also costs much more than £200 😉.
> at £600, for an add-on? I don't think so, not that rich.


Fair enough, but I think you'll struggle to find any current product that meets your needs (I.e. beats BTR5 for sound quality yet doesn't cost a lot more), good luck though.


----------



## hkpants

Kentajalli said:


> qdelix is pretty much the same price & size of Fiio BTR5, not to mention uses same chips. Now I am a believer in Fiio, I don't think using same chips and technology and at same price, it would better Fiio by much if any.
> Also the Poly was mentioned . it.
> does use BT, but it is much more than that.
> Also costs much more than £200 😉.
> at £600, for an add-on? I don't think so, not that rich.


Fiio typically has great hardware but their software implementation is not as great. The Q's claim is that they excel on the software side of thing. Obviously, I have not tried the Q, but the ES100 has great software which I utilize all the time.


----------



## Kentajalli (May 23, 2020)

Q Mass said:


> Fair enough, but I think you'll struggle to find any current product that meets your needs (I.e. beats BTR5 for sound quality yet doesn't cost a lot more), good luck though.


Well let's be fair.
Fiio costs £90 , I said £200 for BT only. by default ,  I don't need USB, multisampling / bit depth or DSD .
I believe I widened the goal posts.


----------



## ClieOS

Kentajalli said:


> Well let's be fair.
> Fiio costs £90 , I said £200 for BT only. by default ,  I don't need USB, multisampling / bit depth or DSD .
> I believe I widened the goal posts.



You are not happy with BTR5's level of performance and demand something better (*as shown by your satisfaction with Mojo) - I own pretty much all the good BT adapters in the market now (as well as Mojo), so it is somewhat obvious to me what you are looking is not going to be found on the BT adapter sector, but more toward to a full-sized DAC/amp with BT support. You should start your own thread to look for a full-sized portable BT DAC/amp, as you are looking in the wrong place for answer where most of us here are fairly happy to balance our demand between SQ and convenience.


----------



## ack84

ClieOS said:


> If you insist on using EQ on BTR3K...


Beside the headroom reservation mentioned earlier, what other reason/s might one consider when deciding to use EQ? Presumably, presets wouldn’t represent the best end state for every listener.

Can someone point me to any guides for setting EQ to complement ear buds/IEMs?


----------



## ClieOS

ack84 said:


> Beside the headroom reservation mentioned earlier, what other reason/s might one consider when deciding to use EQ? Presumably, presets wouldn’t represent the best end state for every listener.
> 
> Can someone point me to any guides for setting EQ to complement ear buds/IEMs?



Using EQ is like using seasoning in cooking - some like their food a little hotter, some like it a little saltier, some like it a little sweeter - it is all about getting it to match your taste, and no one can tell you what your taste is like except for yourself.

Of course, the better way of matching your taste in the first place is with a pair of headphone that is closest to what you prefer, then EQ it for fine-tuning. If you are happy with the headphone's sound as it is, then there is no need for EQ. However, if the headphone doesn't really match your taste in one bit, then EQ won't likely to help much.


----------



## ack84

ClieOS said:


> Of course, the better way of matching your taste in the first place is with a pair of headphone that is closest to what you prefer, then EQ it for fine-tuning.


Like you say, the “taste” target is subjective, so what methods besides trial and error might I use to fine-tune? Continuing your analogy, I feel like going in to the EQ blind is like cooking without a recipe - i might ruin the meal by adding in too much seasoning! Is there some reference track/s or some write-up as a starting point?


----------



## ClieOS

ack84 said:


> ... Is there some reference track/s or some write-up as a starting point?



Google is your friend.


----------



## MewCore

ack84 said:


> Beside the headroom reservation mentioned earlier, what other reason/s might one consider when deciding to use EQ? Presumably, presets wouldn’t represent the best end state for every listener.
> 
> Can someone point me to any guides for setting EQ to complement ear buds/IEMs?


I love how bass boost works on FiiO's wired amp's like Q1 MKII, E10K, K3 etc so I simulated it on BTR3K. 
It would be nice if their Control app had a virtual switch for that as well. 
I have set it to 31.5@+6, 62@+6, 125@+4 and enjoy it.


----------



## Cuebbing

ClieOS said:


> Then better stick to LDAC and use your music app to adjust for EQ.



Do you notice a difference when using a music app EQ compared to the ES100/BTR5/BTR3K EQ? (Sound quality or other)
I expect not all music apps EQ are equal but I'm thinking of the primary ones like Google Music/YouTube Music, Spotify, Tidal.
I've been told to stick with HW EQ for better performance.


----------



## ClieOS (May 26, 2020)

Cuebbing said:


> Do you notice a difference when using a music app EQ compared to the ES100/BTR5/BTR3K EQ? (Sound quality or other)
> I expect not all music apps EQ are equal but I'm thinking of the primary ones like Google Music/YouTube Music, Spotify, Tidal.
> I've been told to stick with HW EQ for better performance.



All EQ degrade SQ to a certain degree - a really good one does less damage than a poor one. True hardware EQ is done with variable caps and resistors network, but they are big, expensive and hard to implement, so they are mostly for stage and studio use. Digital EQ is done purely in the digital domain - they got a bad name because old digital EQ is only 16bit (which is what most music originally has, as it gives you up to 96dB range to cover what we need for most music). Every adjustment cuts into the bit depth of the music so the bigger the adjustment, the more bit-depth it will take away. That means you might ends up only getting 12~14bits of music from the original 16bits, and that affects SQ noticeably as the dynamic range gets compressed. Most digital EQ these days is done in a different way, namely by internally resample (either via the software or a DSP) to 24 or 32 bits first, then applies the EQ on top of it. That means even after adjustment and bit-depth lost, you will still left with more than enough bit-depth than it needs, covering 16bits and more.  A complex software EQ will be able to accomplish more by smart internal calculation, but it do takes a powerful CPU to do the job. The EQ insides ES100 / BTR5 alike are also digital EQ runs on the built-in DSP function of the Bluetooth chip, and it is not going to be particularly powerful as the same chip also needs to handle all the Bluetooth functions. In that sense, your smartphone can offer much higher processing power than the Bluetooth chip and thus allows a more advanced software EQ to be use (*of course, it won't help if you use a poor software EQ on the smartphone).


----------



## Cuebbing

Thank you



ClieOS said:


> All EQ degrade SQ to a certain degree - a really good one does less damage than a poor one. True hardware EQ is done with variable caps and resistors network, but they are big, expensive and hard to implement, so they are mostly for stage and studio use. Digital EQ is done purely in the digital domain - they got a bad name because old digital EQ is only 16bit (which is what most music originally has, as it gives you up to 96dB range to cover what we need for most music). Every adjustment cuts into the bit depth of the music so the bigger the adjustment, the more bit-depth it will take away. That means you might ends up only getting 12~14bits of music from the original 16bits, and that affects SQ noticeably as the dynamic range gets compressed. Most digital EQ these days is done in a different way, namely by internally resample (either via the software or a DSP) to 24 or 32 bits first, then applies the EQ on top of it. That means even after adjustment and bit-depth lost, you will still left with more than enough bit-depth than it should cover 16bits and more  A complex software EQ will be able to accomplish more by smart internal calculation, but it do takes a powerful CPU to do the job. The EQ insides ES100 / BTR5 alike are also digital EQ runs on the built-in DSP function of the Bluetooth chip, and it is not going to be particularly powerful as the same chip also needs to handle all the Bluetooth functions. In that sense, your smartphone can offer much higher processing power than the Bluetooth chip and thus allows a more advantage software EQ to be use (*of course, it won't help if you use a poor software EQ on the smartphone).


----------



## Kentajalli

> of course, it won't help if you use a poor software EQ on the smartphone).


https://neutronmp.com/


----------



## Akira1977

Hello guys,

i'm looking for a Bluetooth Amp with these characteristics:

USB DAC,
Good power output  ( i have a FiiO E11K and when is connected with my OP7 Pro, i'm happy about the power, i use 6/7/8 on the volume rocker, with my KZ ATE),
Good sound quality,
Maybe a decent app to control the differents settings, but i'm not very interested in equalisation and other stuff...

I saw the Hiby W5, but it doesn't work as a USB DAC...

I'm also waiting for the Qudelix 5K but i don't know if it worth  it or not...

Any suggestions?

Thank you!


----------



## Cuebbing

*ClieOS provided a good review and comparison of his preferred BT DAC/AMPS in this thread.  I have most of the items he reviewed and agree with his findings.  ES100/BTR5/BTR3K all work perform well compared to what's available.*


----------



## Akira1977

Cuebbing said:


> *ClieOS provided a good review and comparison of his preferred BT DAC/AMPS in this thread.  I have most of the items he reviewed and agree with his findings.  ES100/BTR5/BTR3K all work perform well compared to what's available.*



I know, but i'm not fully convinced about the power output...

I mean, i use In Earphones, but it doesn't seem to me that those BT DAC offers a good amount of power. Maybe i should use a portable DAC without Bluetooth, like FiiO K3...


----------



## ClieOS

Akira1977 said:


> I know, but i'm not fully convinced about the power output...
> 
> I mean, i use In Earphones, but it doesn't seem to me that those BT DAC offers a good amount of power. Maybe i should use a portable DAC without Bluetooth, like FiiO K3...



FiiO K3 is not actually portable but more like transportable - given it must be powered by USB port and a smartphone won't likely will be about to power it (even if it does, it will drain the smartphone battery super fast). In any case, KZ ATE should be plenty easy to drive that most of the good BT adapter in the list should drive it just fine.

Also, if you are not going to use the Bluetooth function but only as an USB DAC, then you are kinda looking in the wrong place. A decent pig-tail style USB adapter should be what you are looking for, not a BT adapter will USB DAC function. Here are some example: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the...myee-audirect-hilidac-atom-pro-beam-2.927067/

Another option is USB DAC/amp with battery, such as Topping NX4, iFi xDSD, Chord Mojo, etc.


----------



## Akira1977

I understand!

I would like to use the BT function, my only worries, were the power output and the little lag ( but that just in movies)

Do you think the Qudelix 5K could be an improvement over the ES100 or the BTR3K?


----------



## Cuebbing

In the past I experienced audio lag while watching YouTube videos (and others) with bluetooth devices, but with most of the newer ones (BT 5.0 etc) I haven't had that happen.
For power, I'm not sure what problem you're thinking of but like CLIEOS mentioned the KZ ATE should work well with any of the recommended BT devices.  The *ES100/BTR5/BTR3K* should power most IEMs fine.  Some headphones may have some challenges but I'm not knowledgeable on headphones.
I use the ES100 the most and it will play any of my IEMs louder than my ears can take (so will the Fiio).


----------



## Cuebbing

The Qudelix 5K is hard to answer since it's not available but by the info listed it could/should be close in performance with the ES100/BTR5/BTR3K.  It's all speculation until we can try it.  Out of curiosity I'll get one when they're available.  I'll be interested in the sound quality (aren't we all lol), the app, and battery life.


----------



## ClieOS

Akira1977 said:


> Do you think the Qudelix 5K could be an improvement over the ES100 or the BTR3K?



Won't be much of a point if it doesn't. Then again, we won't know till it is released and tested.


----------



## Akira1977

ClieOS said:


> Won't be much of a point if it doesn't. Then again, we won't know till it is released and tested.



I have purchased the KZ ZS10 Pro, i just need to decide between the ES100 and the BTR3K. ( or maybe a powered DAC without BT to avoid to spend too much...)

If i want to use one of the two directly connected to the USB port of the phone, what is the maximum quality as DAC? ( 48 kHz/16 bit for both, right? )

What is the power output of the ES100 with 32 Ohm? ( ZS10 are 30 Ohm, but just to compare with the BTR3K)

Thank you!


----------



## ClieOS

Akira1977 said:


> I have purchased the KZ ZS10 Pro, i just need to decide between the ES100 and the BTR3K. ( or maybe a powered DAC without BT to avoid to spend too much...)
> 
> If i want to use one of the two directly connected to the USB port of the phone, what is the maximum quality as DAC? ( 48 kHz/16 bit for both, right? )
> 
> ...



Yes, both are 16/48 max for USB DAC.

Redsone never release any official number regarding it's output power, but from the chips it used we know it won't likely going to be higher than BTR3K under the same condition. Both should however be more than enough for a 30 ohm load.


----------



## Akira1977

ClieOS said:


> Yes, both are 16/48 max for USB DAC.
> 
> Redsone never release any official number regarding it's output power, but from the chips it used we know it won't likely going to be higher than BTR3K under the same condition. Both should however be more than enough for a 30 ohm load.



I'm asking myself, if maybe it's better to go for a simple DAC/AMP not powered adaptor, but they are hard to find, especially on Amazon.

And i know really really poor things about them...

I would like to have a better quality than 16 bit / 48 Khz...


----------



## Lohb

Akira1977 said:


> I'm asking myself, if maybe it's better to go for a simple DAC/AMP not powered adaptor, but they are hard to find, especially on Amazon.
> 
> And i know really really poor things about them...
> 
> I would like to have a better quality than 16 bit / 48 Khz...


Check out latest E1DA 9038s Mk3 if you don't need bluetooth. On Aliexpress and this thread...
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/e1d...8x-hifitoy-hptoy.915835/page-50#post-15642045


----------



## Akira1977

Lohb said:


> Check out latest E1DA 9038s Mk3 if you don't need bluetooth. On Aliexpress and this thread...
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/e1d...8x-hifitoy-hptoy.915835/page-50#post-15642045



The earphones are not balanced... 3,5 mm jack!

The new model 9040 will be out soon!

I have just ordered a Musiland MU2 from HiFiGo...

We will see!!!


----------



## waynes world (Jun 3, 2020)

Hey @ClieOS, I just found out about my favorite thread (the earbuds roundup thread)  Many people think of that thread as their home base on head-fi, so hopefully it can be re-opened again someday 

But back on track, I am loving the BTR3K. Perfect size. Buttons that I can actually use. Excellent sound. Excellent battery life. Thanks again for recommending it!

Edit: I also really like the clip case. You can put the BTR3K in it any way you like depending on if you like your cable up or down,  and which side you want your buttons on. Clever!

I also got that shirt clip thingy that you suggested somewhere, and it comes in quite handy for a lot of things as well.

Cheers


----------



## Cuebbing

waynes world said:


> I also got that shirt clip thingy that you suggested somewhere, and it comes in quite handy for a lot of things as well.


Hi, I've also been thinking about getting the shirt clip that ClieOS recommended.  Are you satisfied with the strength of the magnetic hold?
Thanks


----------



## dh0licious

waynes world said:


> Hey @ClieOS, I just found out about my favorite thread (the earbuds roundup thread)  Many people think of that thread as their home base on head-fi, so hopefully it can be re-opened again someday



What is the story?



Cuebbing said:


> Hi, I've also been thinking about getting the shirt clip that ClieOS recommended.  Are you satisfied with the strength of the magnetic hold?
> Thanks



I'm interested in the shirt clip. Where can I see details?


----------



## waynes world

Cuebbing said:


> Hi, I've also been thinking about getting the shirt clip that ClieOS recommended.  Are you satisfied with the strength of the magnetic hold?
> Thanks



VERY strong. It's actually hard to separate the two pieces.



dh0licious said:


> I'm interested in the shirt clip. Where can I see details?



I see that it's in the first post of this thread.


----------



## Infoseeker

Do any of these (es100, lotoo p1, qudilex, btr5k) have a dedicated chip for handling EQ... Like the full fledged Lotoo dap?


----------



## rkw

Infoseeker said:


> Do any of these (es100, lotoo p1, qudilex, btr5k) have a dedicated chip for handling EQ


No. That would use too much space and power consumption for these small devices. DSP functions are already integrated into the Bluetooth and DAC chips.


----------



## ClieOS

Infoseeker said:


> Do any of these (es100, lotoo p1, qudilex, btr5k) have a dedicated chip for handling EQ... Like the full fledged Lotoo dap?



EQ these days is a software intensive process - if you consider that the most powerful Bluetooth chip in the market (Qualcomm QCC5121) only offers dual cores 120MHz of processing power (where it needs to share to other BT function) while a mainstream Qualcomm SnapDragon 855 has 8 cores design (one 2.8Ghz + three 2.4GHz + four 1.8GHz), then it should be clear that any DSP chip you can reasonably use on a small BT device can never beat the raw processing power that a smartphone can provide to its app.


----------



## Saltjo

I just wanted to let you know my impressions of the Hiby w3, as I got problems with the bluetooth reception. In case I stand next to my mobile but the receiver does not face it directy it got lots of dropouts. This very annoying when doing sports and I don't see the point why I should go wireless then. I told Hiby about the problem and just got the following answer: "Thanks a lot for your feedback. We will provide your positive feedback to improve our products in the future." At a second try I got almost the same response. This does not sound like I got a faulty device - and even if this was the case, costumer service is really bad.


----------



## ClieOS

Saltjo said:


> I just wanted to let you know my impressions of the Hiby w3, as I got problems with the bluetooth reception. In case I stand next to my mobile but the receiver does not face it directy it got lots of dropouts. This very annoying when doing sports and I don't see the point why I should go wireless then. I told Hiby about the problem and just got the following answer: "Thanks a lot for your feedback. We will provide your positive feedback to improve our products in the future." At a second try I got almost the same response. This does not sound like I got a faulty device - and even if this was the case, costumer service is really bad.



What smartphone and BT codec are you using?


----------



## Saltjo

ClieOS said:


> What smartphone and BT codec are you using?



Huawei P10 and AAC. (Hiby did not even want to know)


----------



## ClieOS

Saltjo said:


> Huawei P10 and AAC. (Hiby did not even want to know)



Huawei is known to have odd BT implementation, I wonder if that's the case.


----------



## Infoseeker

Does the P10 have the special codec that HiBy w3 supports?

Or is it too old a Huawei phone?


----------



## Saltjo

Codec auto-selected by Huawei. No option to change it except developer mode. It did not have similar dropouts using btr3. So I guess it is not the phone.


----------



## harry218 (Jun 5, 2020)

Hi, thanks for the detailed impressions on each bluetooth receiver-dac. I actually just got myself the UP4 for cheaper (~$75) than the listed price here. I did look for measurements of some sort before buying but hadn't found one so I bought one anyway because I was in rush need for a portable solution to use with my IEMs when outside. This thread was somehow not shown on search engine. Anyway, my first impression of UP4 is it's quite thick (warm?) and smooth sounding at least for me. Did Shanling change something in their latest firmware (v1.2.3)? I tried this via the SE output though haven't got a chance to try the balanced output.


----------



## Lohb (Jun 15, 2020)

Appreciating the BTR5 much more now with big cans on and wanting to jump up and get something across the room etc.

I'm not sure why these BT receivers seem to choose 48k vs 44k as a choice so you are not up-sampling to that frequency...doubt it matters.
since the source file is going away from bitperfect with the codecs anyway.

Edit :I guess not everyone has only 44k files anyway.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> Appreciating the BTR5 much more now with big cans on and wanting to jump up and get something across the room etc.
> 
> I'm not sure why these BT receivers seem to choose 48k vs 44k as a choice so you are not up-sampling to that frequency...doubt it matters.
> since the source file is going away from bitperfect with the codecs anyway.
> ...



Besides what sampling rate that music are in, sometime it is the OS that resamples everything. Android, for an example, has a bad habit of resampling everything into 48kHz by default, unless you use an music playing app to stop it from doing so.


----------



## Pro-Jules (Jun 16, 2020)

Hi. @ClieOS 

LDAC (with ability to eq) and balanced 2.5 fan here

What is the current comparison of Qudelix-5K and Radsone ES100 MK2

is the Qudelix-5K iOS app ready for prime time yet? 


And - Is there another rival with LDAC & eq possibilities?

thanks!


----------



## ClieOS

Pro-Jules said:


> Hi. @ClieOS
> 
> LDAC (with ability to eq) and balanced 2.5 fan here
> 
> ...


No one does EQ on LDAC except for ES100 for now. While 5K will get this function over time, I don't expect it's app to be as polished as ES100's on the beginning so it won't be a completely fair comparison between the two. FiiO has mentioned that they are trying to develop a firmware for BTR5 that can do EQ over LDAC, but so far we haven't really seen anything concrete.


----------



## Pro-Jules

ClieOS said:


> No one does EQ on LDAC except for ES100 for now. While 5K will get this function over time, I don't expect it's app to be as polished as ES100's on the beginning so it won't be a completely fair comparison between the two. FiiO has mentioned that they are trying to develop a firmware for BTR5 that can do EQ over LDAC, but so far we haven't really seen anything concrete.



Back to Radsone for me then! thanks.

My diy / hacked Fiio LDAC neckband Is starting to have intermittent cut out issues as the soldering (I cut the ear hook parts off and grafted on Ares II 2 pin terminations) tnever really took properly.

I am also getting some Snugs custom ear moulds made for a ATH-aDSR5BT neckband. I like their pure digital drive speaker tech.but sadly they can’t multi pair pair to my phone and DAP like an ES100 can.


----------



## Lohb

LDAC clearly better than aptX or marginally ?
I have not had enough time to focus on the filters on BTR5, but it seemed so granular if anything.. cycling through a few times.


----------



## MewCore

Lohb said:


> LDAC clearly better than aptX or marginally ?
> I have not had enough time to focus on the filters on BTR5, but it seemed so granular if anything.. cycling through a few times.


I can't hear any difference between AptxHD vs LDAC. Different filters also seem to be doing not much at all, though I'm talking about BTR3k.


----------



## Lohb

I'd just be looking for best sub-bass extension out these LP filters if that is what they are doing, subtle shaping of the low-end.


----------



## Pro-Jules

Lohb said:


> I'd just be looking for best sub-bass extension out these LP filters if that is what they are doing, subtle shaping of the low-end.


Auditioning them I find “slow” seems to favour low end punch.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Lohb said:


> I'd just be looking for best sub-bass extension out these LP filters if that is what they are doing, subtle shaping of the low-end.





Lohb said:


> LDAC clearly better than aptX or marginally ?
> I have not had enough time to focus on the filters on BTR5, but it seemed so granular if anything.. cycling through a few times.


Marginally at best for me.
Technically with files up to CD quality aptX HD will pass on just as much info as LDAC, since it does 24bit/48kHz. In those cases 660 LDAC is actually preferable to the 990 max quality setting since it’s more stable and you don't need the extra kbps. Even LDAC vs regular aptX on CD quality files the difference is subtle, often nill.

One thing to keep in mind is that each of these codecs actually has its own tuning on the receiver side. The data is compressed and decompressed using different algorithms; but mostly the music that comes out of that process is subject to a little processing as it’s being rendered. This is easy to test on the ES100, where care has been taken to tune the codecs differently. You can use a Spotify stream so that the data rate of aptX is not a bottleneck, and a source that supports aptX, aptX HD and LDAC, and hear it with your own ears, it’s an interesting experiment. aptX sounds the bassiest, LDAC puts higher freqs forward, aptX HD sits in the middle and I like it best.


----------



## SyCoREAPER (Jun 20, 2020)

Just wanted to pop in here and say thanks for the information on the FiiO BTR3K. I came across the BTR3 about a week ago on a few sites and bought it on Amazon. Today I stumbled here (did I miss the mention of it on this site or did this site now show not show up? I don't know, glad it did now) and became aware of the BTR3K and am eagerly returning the former in favor of the latter.

I have a somewhat on-topic/off-topic question.

Would I be better off using the BTR3K with it's AK4377A*2 using LDAC (phone doesn't have AptxHD) or a generic USB-C to 3.5mm with an ALC4050/4042 (they claim it's a 4050) if I can help it? Obviously having the flexibility is phenomenal and I know obviously with good equipment a wired connection is better but am leery of this whole tiny dac chip in the cable approach and am not that familiar with Intel HD chips.

Update 6/20/20
Got my BTR3K, while I like it overall and performance is better, still can't get 990kbps anywhere near reliably... I don't know if it's my S20 U or the receiver. My phone supports all the BT 5.0 protocols to date.


----------



## E8ArmyDiver

Hi everyone.I'm sorry but I couldn't get through all 39 pages so I'll just ask.I have HiFiMan Sundara..Recommend me the best sounding adapter that will work with them please.I valoe an organic,musical presentation & don't want to change the Sundara SQ..Thanks very much..


----------



## Synthy

it seems when most people reply to the "apt-x vs LDAC?" question the replies are about apt-x HD vs LDAC, when in preactice there are actually many less devices that support apt-x HD (not just regular apt-x) than support LDAC. these days almost all android phones for instance support LDAC and apt-x but not apt-x HD. so is there a clear differnce between (non HD) apt-x and LDAC?


----------



## dh0licious

Synthy said:


> it seems when most people reply to the "apt-x vs LDAC?" question the replies are about apt-x HD vs LDAC, when in preactice there are actually many less devices that support apt-x HD (not just regular apt-x) than support LDAC. these days almost all android phones for instance support LDAC and apt-x but not apt-x HD. so is there a clear differnce between (non HD) apt-x and LDAC?



I also want to know


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Synthy said:


> it seems when most people reply to the "apt-x vs LDAC?" question the replies are about apt-x HD vs LDAC, when in preactice there are actually many less devices that support apt-x HD (not just regular apt-x) than support LDAC. these days almost all android phones for instance support LDAC and apt-x but not apt-x HD. so is there a clear differnce between (non HD) apt-x and LDAC?


That ambiguity makes me mad a little bit. Many brands advertise LDAC and aptX support, almost like they’re equivalent, and aptX HD gets lost in the noise. I was told by people who designed high-end BT headphones that there was competition between Qualcomm and Sony, that basically both tried to get exclusive licensing from the brands who sought partnership. That was 2 years ago so maybe things have thawed a little bit with the advent of the BT receiver era.

To me, up to CD quality files I can’t hear any substantial difference, technically basic aptX seems to do the job. I still seek HD support because I feel easier knowing the specs are there and the full bandwidth gets transmitted, even if there’s comp/decompression going on. Also, we’re all looking for that last %, right? While shopping at least; not so much when listening to great tunes as far as I'm concerned!

aptX Adaptive interests me the most but support is thin right now, and yet the mix of stability and compression efficiency should make it the preferable option for smaller receivers, especially true wireless etc.


----------



## ClieOS

Synthy said:


> it seems when most people reply to the "apt-x vs LDAC?" question the replies are about apt-x HD vs LDAC, when in preactice there are actually many less devices that support apt-x HD (not just regular apt-x) than support LDAC. these days almost all android phones for instance support LDAC and apt-x but not apt-x HD. so is there a clear differnce between (non HD) apt-x and LDAC?



First, have a read at this: https://www.androidauthority.com/sony-ldac-codec-790690/

Note that there are 3 variants of LDAC: 330 (connection preferred), 660 (normal) and 990 (SQ preferred) kbps, namely referring to how fast the transfer rate  / connection speed between the source (i.e. smartphone) and the receiver's end (i.e.BT adapter, headphone, etc). Some smartphone allows only two options (best effort for a mix of 330 and 660, or best SQ for a mix of 660 and 990). Of course, the faster the transmission rate, the better the SQ (less compression) but the less stable the connection. Purely on how lossless the transmission is, aptX is roughly the same / slightly better than LDAC 330 while apt HD is about the level of LDAC 660. So it is never quite an one-to-one comparison when you compared aptX to LDAC, but actually which LDAC (330, 660 or 990) that you are comparing to - aptX to LDAC 330 can go both ways (*you might even prefer high bitrate SBC or AAC over them both), aptX to LDAC 600 might have some small difference but aptX to LDAC 990 should be fairly distinguishable to the ears.

On a side note, the lack of popularity of aptX HD has to do with the lack of compatible BT chipset from Qualcomm, as aptX HD requited the BT chip to be able to handle 24bits yet most Qualcomm BT chips are 16bits only. So aptX HD is almost exclusively implemented on Qualcomm's best BT chip at the time, the CSR8675. On the other hand, If you look at LDAC - which required 24/96, but no specific chips requited. However, Qualcomm already dominated BT chip market anyway so most of the gears are build on the same CSR8675 chipset - that means any BT adapter / headphone maker that wants the best BT chips can have a choice of two codecs, and many picked LDAC since it is backed by Sony (more famous and thus better for marketing) and offer better SQ than aptX HD (well, for the most part user get both supported on the same gear anyway). SO while apx HD never quite get as much exposure as LDAC, Qualcomm still makes money since almsot all LDAC gear uses the Qualcomm BT chip (which also supports aptX HD, though some time manufacturer decided to disable it on the firmware level to simplify implementation and only opted to support LDAC). Personally, I think LDAC being more popular also has a lot to do with Sony's better marketing.


----------



## Ynot1

How about battery life trade off, as not all codecs use the same amount of processing to get the job done? I suspect Aptx strives to be efficient.


----------



## Pro-Jules (Jun 23, 2020)

I tried the Hiby codec UTC - it had about a 2 inch range!

I have lost the W5 dongle since, its so small I must have it somewhere..... Might be fun to try it again...

I got all excited about 192K 24bit transmission!


----------



## waynes world

So @ClieOS, what's the verdict? Now that I've gotten all comfortable with my BTR3K, do I need to run out and get the Qudelix-5K?


----------



## ClieOS

waynes world said:


> So @ClieOS, what's the verdict? Now that I've gotten all comfortable with my BTR3K, do I need to run out and get the Qudelix-5K?



Already did some comparison by ears but haven't done any measurement yet, so it will take a few more days to write it out - in any case, so far the super short version for you is that - unless you really want EQ or extra power output, there is no need to rush out for a 5K.


----------



## ClieOS

Qudelix 5K impression added to 2nd post.


----------



## waynes world

ClieOS said:


> Qudelix 5K impression added to 2nd post.



Awesome. I'm sure it's a lot of work to keep an impressions thread like this updated, but it's a great resource and is greatly appreciated. Thanks!


----------



## Raketen (Jul 9, 2020)

Shirt Clip Power Rankings, but I am too lazy to start my own thread and buy enough gear to form a useful opinion so...  

from what i can tell:

best:

Fiio BTR3K
Fiio BTR5
less best:
 shirt.
Shanling UP2
Shanling UP4
least best:

Qdlx 5k
ES100


----------



## rad7

I don't know a lot about codecs like apt-X , LDAC, etc and I'm still new to all this, so my question might sound silly. I have an android phone that doesn't have aptX support. Most of my music is in flac or wav format. So, does it make sense for me to buy ES100 or BTR5 if my phone doesn't have aptX? Or am I better off getting non-bluetooth dongle DACs like Dragonfly Red or IFI Hip?


----------



## ClieOS

rad7 said:


> I don't know a lot about codecs like apt-X , LDAC, etc and I'm still new to all this, so my question might sound silly. I have an android phone that doesn't have aptX support. Most of my music is in flac or wav format. So, does it make sense for me to buy ES100 or BTR5 if my phone doesn't have aptX? Or am I better off getting non-bluetooth dongle DACs like Dragonfly Red or IFI Hip?


 
What brand/model is your smartphone? It is kinda rare to find an Android phone that doesn't support at least aptX these days. 

Anyway, the first thing is for you to decide whether you want the convenience of wireless or not. Even without aptX, your Android should at least have AAC and so you can at least enjoy similar SQ as any Apple iPhone. If you don't need wireless, then dongle will be the next logical choice. Some of the Chinese options are cheaper than Dragonfly but provide just as good, if not better SQ.


----------



## rad7

ClieOS said:


> What brand/model is your smartphone? It is kinda rare to find an Android phone that doesn't support at least aptX these days.
> 
> Anyway, the first thing is for you to decide whether you want the convenience of wireless or not. Even without aptX, your Android should at least have AAC and so you can at least enjoy similar SQ as any Apple iPhone. If you don't need wireless, then dongle will be the next logical choice. Some of the Chinese options are cheaper than Dragonfly but provide just as good, if not better SQ.



Thank you. I have Honor 8 and according to these specifications, it doesn't have aptX or AAC. I'm thinking of replacing my phone with one of the LG phones with the quad-dac later. So, I guess it makes sense for me to settle for a cheaper option until then. Do you have any recommendations for a cheaper alternative for Dragonfly under $100?


----------



## ClieOS

rad7 said:


> Thank you. I have Honor 8 and according to these specifications, it doesn't have aptX or AAC. I'm thinking of replacing my phone with one of the LG phones with the quad-dac later. So, I guess it makes sense for me to settle for a cheaper option until then. Do you have any recommendations for a cheaper alternative for Dragonfly under $100?


Yep, that's a very old smartphone so it makes much more sense to upgrade the smartphone first. I can recommend the DDHiFi TC35B, but you need to make sure your smartphone support USB DAC first as I know some older Huawei don't.


----------



## rkw

rad7 said:


> I have Honor 8 and according to these specifications, it doesn't have aptX or AAC.


It says upgradable to Android 8. If yours is running Android 8, it might have LDAC. You can view the available codecs on your phone in Developer Options. As @ClieOS says, your first consideration is to decide whether you want wireless. Also, what headphones do you want to use with it?



ClieOS said:


> I can recommend the DDHiFi TC35B


That's USB-C, which won't work without an additional adapter on the Honor 8.

Look in the list in the first post for devices that have "USB DAC" and "microUSB". BTW, I notice that ES100 is listed as Type-C, but it's microUSB.


----------



## ClieOS

rkw said:


> That's USB-C, which won't work without an additional adapter on the Honor 8.



GSM Arena listed Honor 8 for having Type-C?


----------



## rkw (Jul 9, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> GSM Arena listed Honor 8 for having Type-C?


It's a 2016 phone and I assumed it wouldn't have USB-C. Looking around, there is conflicting information. This spec says micro USB: https://www.gizmochina.com/product/huawei-honor-8/


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 9, 2020)

rkw said:


> It's a 2016 phone and I assumed it wouldn't have USB-C. Looking around, there is conflicting information. This spec says micro USB: https://www.gizmochina.com/product/huawei-honor-8/



Here is a copy of Honor 8 user manual, Type-C port is clearly listed: https://www.manualslib.com/manual/1181584/Huawei-Honor-8.html?page=12#manual

p/s: Apparently first smartphone with Type-C was introduced in 2015 and in China. So it is not that unlikely a 2016 Chinese smartphone could have one.


----------



## rad7

ClieOS said:


> Yep, that's a very old smartphone so it makes much more sense to upgrade the smartphone first. I can recommend the DDHiFi TC35B, but you need to make sure your smartphone support USB DAC first as I know some older Huawei don't.



Thank you.


----------



## rad7

rkw said:


> It says upgradable to Android 8. If yours is running Android 8, it might have LDAC. You can view the available codecs on your phone in Developer Options. As @ClieOS says, your first consideration is to decide whether you want wireless. Also, what headphones do you want to use with it?
> 
> 
> That's USB-C, which won't work without an additional adapter on the Honor 8.
> ...



Thank you. My phone does have USB-C. But it is only on Android 7. Honor said they might release Android 8 for this phone, but I don't think that will ever happen.

I will be only using IEMs (Moondrop Starfield, CCA C10 & **** ****) with this set up.


----------



## john61ct

Kentajalli said:


> Fiio costs £90 , I said £200 for BT only. by default ,  I don't need USB, multisampling / bit depth or DSD


My reco approach, if you want to "stay tiny" is try the Qudelix 5K in case it is better than BTR5, even just a bit, and then **add** an analog HPamp with higher gain & better impedance to boost your SQ.

The Periodic Nickel maybe? This is my thread on that one narrow topic, apparently the title might still not be clear enough, no traction yet

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/com...-gain-impedance-only-ignore-dac-bt-etc.936950

If the Mojo has line-in maybe use the 5K to BT-enable it, but too kludgey a package for my taste.


----------



## john61ct

ClieOS said:


> I do have my doubt that any smartphone can have headphone-out as good as BTR3K's.


Many smart posters have said it is very difficult to improve on the LG V30 family's analog output with most any portable external unit.

Perhaps that generalization only applies to a certain range of headphone types? I dunno.

My having bought into that "common wisdom" is what led me to question your choice of phone the other day.

Of course if BT really gets "good enough" SQ then all that goes away I guess.


----------



## ClieOS

rad7 said:


> Thank you. My phone does have USB-C. But it is only on Android 7. Honor said they might release Android 8 for this phone, but I don't think that will ever happen.



I'll say your money is best spent on newer smartphone. Getting one of those LG phone than you probably don't need an BT or Type-C adapter.


----------



## ClieOS

john61ct said:


> My having bought into that "common wisdom" is what led me to question your choice of phone the other day.



Can you point me back to which post that is?


----------



## rad7

ClieOS said:


> I'll say your money is best spent on newer smartphone. Getting one of those LG phone than you probably don't need an BT or Type-C adapter.



Thanks, yeah, I agree with you.


----------



## john61ct (Jul 10, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Can you point me back to which post that is?


No one particular post but hundreds, across dozens of forums. I'm not trying to make a case that it's true, just my perception of a widespread consensus, and do not recall any contrary assertions disputing it.

Edit: very next post in my Alert box
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-qudelix-5k-thread.914628/page-67#post-15730091


----------



## ClieOS

john61ct said:


> No one particular post but hundreds, across dozens of forums. I'm not trying to make a case that it's true, just my perception of a widespread consensus, and do not recall any contrary assertions disputing it.
> 
> Edit: very next post in my Alert box
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-qudelix-5k-thread.914628/page-67#post-15730091



I were just curious for not remembering any discussion between you and me involving my 'choice of phone'... also not sure what that link to someone else discussion is meant to say.

Anyway, lets move on.


----------



## john61ct

Sorry I inferred your Q was seeking posts supporting my

> it is very difficult to improve on the LG V30 family's analog output with most any portable external unit

As to your phone I guess just crossed wires, brain fart on my part, sorry.


----------



## IEManiac

ClieOS said:


> Already did some comparison by ears but haven't done any measurement yet, so it will take a few more days to write it out - in any case, so far the super short version for you is that - unless you really want EQ or extra power output, there is no need to rush out for a 5K.


Gotcha! 😉


----------



## ClieOS

Adding TUNAI Square LDAC and YLM B2 to the list. Note that TUNAI Square also has an older aptX version that doesn't support LDAC. YLM B2 on the other hand is designed more like a full sized portable DAC/amp with Bluetooth function, similar in idea to that of Oriolus.


----------



## 0rangutan

ClieOS said:


> Adding TUNAI Square LDAC and YLM B2 to the list. Note that TUNAI Square also has an older aptX version that doesn't support LDAC. YLM B2 on the other hand is designed more like a full sized portable DAC/amp with Bluetooth function, similar in idea to that of Oriolus.


Can you share any links to info on the YLM B2?  Thanks


----------



## ClieOS

0rangutan said:


> Can you share any links to info on the YLM B2?  Thanks



http://www.yinlumei.com/product/product-99-126.html


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

I got Fiio BTR5 yesterday and I have mixed feelings especially after using Hiby W3 before it. It is indeed a genuine step-up in terms of power and SQ wrt W3 but I agree with Clie's impressions. 3.5mm output, there's not much of a difference. I'm yet to try balanced as I don't have any balanced cable at hand. But I expect it to be a huge improvement in power and SQ. Also, wavelet's auto-eq + BTR5 is very very good. Just my 2 cents, for potential buyers.


----------



## audio123 (Jul 25, 2020)

iBasso CF01. Easily the best TWS Bluetooth IEM adapter.


----------



## Ocelitgol

audio123 said:


> iBasso CF01. Easily the best TWS Bluetooth IEM adapter.


Need more info


----------



## audio123

Ocelitgol said:


> Need more info


You can check iBasso FB post, https://www.facebook.com/992950420734170/posts/3673183632710822.


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 26, 2020)

audio123 said:


> You can check iBasso FB post, https://www.facebook.com/992950420734170/posts/3673183632710822.



We have a separated thread for TWS discussion here: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-tws-neckband-bt-cable-adapter-thread.920709/

Here we keep the discussion to hires codec (24bits) capable BT adapter.

Anyway, this new iBasso adapter looks very similar in implementation as OE Audio WS-1.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> Anyway, this new iBasso adapter looks very similar in implementation as OE Audio WS-1.


While looking much better! MMCX-only was to be expected from iBasso but still I’m disappointed.


----------



## Jaysound

I am ready to buy and try one of these BT adapters, and would love advice on which to get:

ES100
FiiO BTR3K/BTR5
Quedelix 5K
I'm using Shure SE425 IEMs with a Samsung S9 with LDAC enabled, playing Tidal and Spotify, mainly soft rock.

Whatever I buy, I expect I'll use LDAC.

I have yet to find anything that adds amp or EQ that I like -- seems to compromise more than it improves -- but I haven't tried a lot or spent a lot. (Tried Wavelet EQ app, which I deleted. Tried FiiO LC-BT2 neckband BT adapter with MMCX connectors and returned it -- even using LDAC it didn't sound nearly as good as the Shure RMCE-BT2 BT adapter using AptX. I even tried the Shure SE535 IEMs and returned them because I prefer the natural sound of the SE425).

Sometimes I feel I would like a bit more oomph at the low end with the SE425, but when I play a song that delivers serious bass (beginning of _50 Way to Leave Your Lover_, for instance) it's already solid at a rock, so what would I gain by boosting when the SE425 is stellar at natural, unadulterated sound? So I doubt I'd use, say, the EQ in the Quedelix 5K, but who knows? I'm happy to try. I just would prefer not having to buy and try three products, so advice is greatly appreciated.

AND... it's important to me that I can use the in-line controls on the Shure cable that came with the SE425 (skip track, vol, play/pause, assistant, and the mic to at least answer a call and tell them I need a moment to get off that headset). I hope that's realistic with one of those adapters. I will be using it mainly while practicing tai chi and such, which means it will be clipped to the _back_ of my waist-pack belt. Though I guess I can keep it 45 degrees on the side/back on the belt and reach down to hit buttons to do all that. I guess it might be even easier than grabbing the on-cable control.


----------



## manukmanohar (Jul 30, 2020)

Deleted


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 30, 2020)

Jaysound said:


> ...
> AND... it's important to me that I can use the in-line controls on the Shure cable that came with the SE425 (skip track, vol, play/pause, assistant, and the mic to at least answer a call and tell them I need a moment to get off that headset). I hope that's realistic with one of those adapters. I will be using it mainly while practicing tai chi and such, which means it will be clipped to the _back_ of my waist-pack belt. Though I guess I can keep it 45 degrees on the side/back on the belt and reach down to hit buttons to do all that. I guess it might be even easier than grabbing the on-cable control.



I know ES100 doesn't support inline mic+remote, so I didn't bother testing it. Here are however the test result of BTR3K, BTR5 and 5K using inline mic+remote. The test is carried out with a generic Android compatible inline mic+remote as well as a genuine Apple earpods with inline mic+remote

BTR3K  (*need to make sure inline function is enabled in app first)
Android inline mic+remote​Mic - Works​Play / Pause - Works​Volume Up/Down - Works​Apple inline mic+remote​Mic - Works​Play / Pause - Works​Volume Up/Down - Doesn't Work​
BTR5
Android inline mic+remote​Mic - Works​Play / Pause - Works​Volume Up/Down - Works​Apple inline mic+remote​Mic - Works​Play / Pause - Works​Volume Up/Down - Doesn't Work​​5K (*need to make sure inline mic is enabled in app first)
Android inline mic+remote​Mic - Works​Play / Pause - Doesn't Work​Volume Up/Down - Doesn't Work​Apple inline mic+remote​Mic - Works​Play / Pause - Doesn't Work​Volume Up/Down - Doesn't Work​​To sum it up, BTR3K and BTR5 havr the same behavior except BTR3K has the ability to enable / disable inline mic+ remote function via app. Android inline mic+remote works just fine with both but Apple inline mic+ remote only works partially. 5K on the other hand only able to utilize the inline mic but not able to use any of the buttons. So while you can talk into the mic, you still need to press the buttons on 5K itself to pick / hang up call as well as controlling volume.


----------



## Jaysound

ClieOS said:


> <snip>
> 
> To sum it up, BTR3K and BTR5 havr the same behavior except BTR3K has the ability to enable / disable inline mic+ remote function via app. Android inline mic+remote works just fine with both but Apple inline mic+ remote only works partially. 5K on the other hand only able to utilize the inline mic but not able to use any of the buttons. So while you can talk into the mic, you still need to press the buttons on 5K itself to pick / hang up call as well as controlling volume.


Thank you so much for that!

It occurs to me I can reach down to the phone on my hip for vol up/dn (unless I have it nearby and not on my hip, which might occur if the BT device is doing the job well), and for that matter can reach down to the BT device also on my hip (not as conveniently since it will be more to the back than the side) for controls on the device.

Can you perhaps tell me which of those functions are available directly on the BT device and reasonably easy to access from the belt?

And should I assume these are enough reasons for my decisions? LDAC SQ should be close enough? Or should I ask you to please just briefly weigh in on that also?

Speaking of weighing in, since I'm training while wearing these, size and weight is a small consideration also, though I doubt any is an issue -- it's just a bit better if it has less.

Thank you again!


----------



## waynes world

Jaysound said:


> It occurs to me I can reach down to the phone on my hip for vol up/dn (unless I have it nearby and not on my hip, which might occur if the BT device is doing the job well), and for that matter can reach down to the BT device also on my hip (not as conveniently since it will be more to the back than the side) for controls on the device.
> 
> Can you perhaps tell me which of those functions are available directly on the BT device and reasonably easy to access from the belt?



Just thought I'd mention that smart watches can typically be used to control play/pause and vol up/dn on your phone. I find it to be quite convenient.


----------



## bobbooo

ClieOS said:


> From upper left: FiiO BTR5, FiiO BTR3K, FiiO BTR3, Hiby W3, Hiby W5, Shanling UP4
> From lower left: TempoTec Blue, EarStudio ES100,  Qudelix 5K, Shanling UP2
> 
> 
> ...




Thanks for the Qudelix 5K impressions! Could you upload your RMAA measurements for it by any chance?


----------



## Jaysound

waynes world said:


> Just thought I'd mention that smart watches can typically be used to control play/pause and vol up/dn on your phone. I find it to be quite convenient.


Thanks. Maybe in the future. Right now I wear a Garmin fenix 3 which I don't think goes that far, and when I'm training it's not really convenient to wear a watch (tai chi, chi gong, and a little mild kung fu mixed in).

I am considering the idea of reaching down to the BT adapter on my belt and using onboard controls, though. If they're there and reasonably easy to find/use, that should be fine.


----------



## Ocelitgol

Jaysound said:


> Thanks. Maybe in the future. Right now I wear a Garmin fenix 3 which I don't think goes that far, and when I'm training it's not really convenient to wear a watch (tai chi, chi gong, and a little mild kung fu mixed in).
> 
> I am considering the idea of reaching down to the BT adapter on my belt and using onboard controls, though. If they're there and reasonably easy to find/use, that should be fine.


I clip on my belt with BTR5. The buttons build is solid and tactile so its easy to press without looking. If I have a phone call, I just bring it near my mouth or clip onto my shirt


----------



## Jaysound (Jul 30, 2020)

Ocelitgol said:


> I clip on my belt with BTR5. The buttons build is solid and tactile so its easy to press without looking. If I have a phone call, I just bring it near my mouth or clip onto my shirt


Yeah, I'm thinking answering phone calls is the least of my priorities, since the inline mic in the cable is usually so poorly positioned behind my head it doesn't do much good anyway.

Having said that, though, what really has been working great for me is the use of the inline mic to tell the Google assistant what I want it to do with my music! It's been a fascinating discovery! I can be listening to Tidal or Spotify and while my hands are busy with my training I can just say "Ok Google -- Play Moody Blues" or Ok Google - Next" or "Okay Google -- add volume" and it usually works! I can pause/play that way, have it pick a song, etc. Even tell it to open Tidal or Spotify. So, that's a high priority for me in picking which device to get.


----------



## ClieOS

Jaysound said:


> ...
> Can you perhaps tell me which of those functions are available directly on the BT device and reasonably easy to access from the belt?
> 
> And should I assume these are enough reasons for my decisions? LDAC SQ should be close enough? Or should I ask you to please just briefly weigh in on that also?
> ...



Buttons on BTR3K, BTR5 and 5K will allow you to play / pause (+ pick / hang up phone call) and volume up/down (+ next / previous track). Pressing these buttons from the belt will require a little bit of a learning curve, though nothing impossible - I reckon 5K with its bigger buttons will be the easiest to press, but also easiest to mis-press. As far as weight is concerned, I think none of them will be a problem when you clip them to your belt.



bobbooo said:


> Thanks for the Qudelix 5K impressions! Could you upload your RMAA measurements for it by any chance?



RMAA results are only comparable using the same measurement rig done on the same time (*they are relative result, not absolute result). Unless there is a good reason (*such as the odd result I got from UP4), I don't generally upload them as it will confuse those who don't know that these results are not comparable to others RMAA measurement.


----------



## Jaysound

As I mentioned earlier: _"Tried FiiO LC-BT2 neckband BT adapter with MMCX connectors and returned it -- even using LDAC it didn't sound nearly as good as the Shure RMCE-BT2 BT adapter using AptX."_ (The Shure RMCE-BT2 doesn't support LDAC.)

So, now I want to try a belt-clip type BT adapter and am leaning towards the FiiO BTR3K/BTR5, which I plan to again be using with LDAC. The question is whether I can expect improved SQ as compared to the FiiO LC-BT2 that I did not find very good even when using LDAC?


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 31, 2020)

Without actually hearing the LC-BT2 myself, I can't draw a firm conclusion that whether it is better or worst than any other gear. However, what I can say is that LDAC is merely one factor of SQ, just because something supports it doesn't automatically make it better or worst than something else that has different hardware or BT codec.


----------



## Jaysound

ClieOS said:


> Without actually hearing the LC-BT2 myself, I can't draw a firm conclusion that whether it is better or worst than any other gear. However, what I can say is that LDAC is merely one factor of SQ, just because something supports it doesn't automatically make it better or worst than something else that has different hardware or BT codec.


I agree. I learned that the hard way when I found the Shure RMCE-BT2 sounds much nicer to me with just AptX than the FiiO LC-BT2 sounded using LDAC. And I believe it was you who elaborated for me about the other factors mattering just as much besides just the codec?)

Hence, my concern about how the BTR5 sounds. I'm hopeful in terms of form factor, features, and reviews, and yet I'm reserved about getting my hopes up too much.


----------



## waynes world

Jaysound said:


> Thanks. Maybe in the future. Right now I wear a Garmin fenix 3 which I don't think goes that far, and when I'm training it's not really convenient to wear a watch (tai chi, chi gong, and a little mild kung fu mixed in).
> 
> I am considering the idea of reaching down to the BT adapter on my belt and using onboard controls, though. If they're there and reasonably easy to find/use, that should be fine.



Got it. Fwiw, I have the Garmin Fenix 3 HR, so yours probably has it. But I understand your other points.



Jaysound said:


> Yeah, I'm thinking answering phone calls is the least of my priorities, since the inline mic in the cable is usually so poorly positioned behind my head it doesn't do much good anyway.
> 
> Having said that, though, what really has been working great for me is the use of the inline mic to tell the Google assistant what I want it to do with my music! It's been a fascinating discovery! I can be listening to Tidal or Spotify and while my hands are busy with my training I can just say "Ok Google -- Play Moody Blues" or Ok Google - Next" or "Okay Google -- add volume" and it usually works! I can pause/play that way, have it pick a song, etc. Even tell it to open Tidal or Spotify. So, that's a high priority for me in picking which device to get.



Hmm, I'll have to try that


----------



## Jaysound

waynes world said:


> Fwiw, I have the Garmin Fenix 3 HR, so yours probably has it.


Hmm, I'll have to try that.


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

Jaysound said:


> I agree. I learned that the hard way when I found the Shure RMCE-BT2 sounds much nicer to me with just AptX than the FiiO LC-BT2 sounded using LDAC. And I believe it was you who elaborated for me about the other factors mattering just as much besides just the codec?)
> 
> Hence, my concern about how the BTR5 sounds. I'm hopeful in terms of form factor, features, and reviews, and yet I'm reserved about getting my hopes up too much.



BTR5 is very capable Bt DAC amp. SQ is very neutral-ish to my ears. But it can be EQ'd as well. For EQ'ing om LDAC, you can use wavelet app. Works like a charm. And if you don't use or prefer EQ, then too SQ is great especially when used balanced out. To be honest, if this is your first BT Amp, you can't go wrong with BTR 5. I haven't heard BTR3k and 5K so can't comment on them


----------



## Ocelitgol

1 more vote for BTR5. I use it to drive Sony IER-Z1R and the sound is fantastic.


----------



## Jaysound

Dani157 said:


> BTR5 is very capable Bt DAC amp. SQ is very neutral-ish to my ears. But it can be EQ'd as well. For EQ'ing om LDAC, you can use wavelet app. Works like a charm. And if you don't use or prefer EQ, then too SQ is great especially when used balanced out. To be honest, if this is your first BT Amp, you can't go wrong with BTR 5. I haven't heard BTR3k and 5K so can't comment on them


The only previous experience I have is the BT adapter cable from Shure that I can only use with AptX which does nicely but is substantially inferior to a direct 3.5mm cable, and the FiiO neckband BT adapter that I used with LDAC and had substantially inferior SQ compared to the Shure BT on AptX (in my judgment).


----------



## bobbooo (Jul 31, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Buttons on BTR3K, BTR5 and 5K will allow you to play / pause (+ pick / hang up phone call) and volume up/down (+ next / previous track). Pressing these buttons from the belt will require a little bit of a learning curve, though nothing impossible - I reckon 5K with its bigger buttons will be the easiest to press, but also easiest to mis-press. As far as weight is concerned, I think none of them will be a problem when you clip them to your belt.
> 
> 
> 
> RMAA results are only comparable using the same measurement rig done on the same time (*they are relative result, not absolute result). Unless there is a good reason (*such as the odd result I got from UP4), I don't generally upload them as it will confuse those who don't know that these results are not comparable to others RMAA measurement.



Ok sure. Could you do me a favor instead? Could you download and play the below 30-second BS EN 50332-1 'Program Simulation Noise' through the Qudelix 5K (USB-C wired connection to source) at maximum volume and record its output (e.g. using the free Audacity program) by connecting the line-out of the 5K via a 3.5mm cable to the highest quality ADC device you have (a PC soundcard line-in would do).

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ocxvs0bhneadcnh/EN50332_ProgSignal_44.16_-10dBFS.wav?dl=0

Then just upload the recorded wav file here or to a file sharing site. This would be much appreciated.


----------



## Jaysound

Ocelitgol said:


> 1 more vote for BTR5. I use it to drive Sony IER-Z1R and the sound is fantastic.


Might be my next IEM purchase (when my next major investor shows up).

Do you use the 3.5mm output or the 2.5mm output with them?


----------



## Jaysound

Anyone aware of a decent aftermarket case with a belt clip for the FiiO BTR5 that's more attractive than the clear plastic belt-clip case that comes with the BTR5?


----------



## Ocelitgol (Aug 2, 2020)

Jaysound said:


> Might be my next IEM purchase (when my next major investor shows up).
> 
> Do you use the 3.5mm output or the 2.5mm output with them?


I bought a 4.4mm to 2.5mm adapter to use it on balanced. Frankly I don't really care about being balanced or not, but more because since I have the 4.4mm cable from Sony, which is very nicely built, I prefer to use it and save the 3.5mm one as backup


Spoiler: Off-topic about IER-Z1R



Just my opinion, I've been in the hobby only for 3 years; but I'm getting tired of the whole buying and selling lower tier gear to try and keep going up the ladder. Even though I still believe that you need to find what sound signature you like, but afterward, just save up for the best (*demo first*) instead of buying other things.
I got lucky-ish with Z1R fit and the sound is definitely my end-game for now. This is the 1st time since I feel no need to look for "better". More time listening less time looking for stuffs


----------



## PsiCore

Probably a nooby question, but I've never used these adapters.
Can I connect an amp to the adapter (e.g. via 3.5) and then headphones to the amp? So a kinda double amplification?


----------



## ClieOS

PsiCore said:


> Probably a nooby question, but I've never used these adapters.
> Can I connect an amp to the adapter (e.g. via 3.5) and then headphones to the amp? So a kinda double amplification?



You can, and yes you will be double amping.


----------



## alex5908

Jaysound said:


> I can be listening to Tidal or Spotify and while my hands are busy with my training I can just say "Ok Google -- Play Moody Blues" or Ok Google - Next" or "Okay Google -- add volume" and it usually works! I can pause/play that way, have it pick a song, etc. Even tell it to open Tidal or Spotify. So, that's a high priority for me in picking which device to get.


Do you mean using BTR5 or Qudelix 5K?


----------



## pstickne (Aug 7, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> I don't think anyone can argue otherwise that EarStudo has fantastic app. While FiiO might not measure up to EarStudio standard, it is still far better than rest of the crowd (*given Hiby's app really does nothing at this point while Shanling app is stuck in production, and the rest simply has no app at all).
> 
> Remember that ES100 doesn't come with as good an app from the start - it also took them months to work out bugs and add features. You have to also keep in mind that Qudelix uses a brand new Qualcomm chips, so app development will not be as straight forward as FiiO's (which uses the older chips that they have been using for awhile now) and could possibly means more time needed to get the app up to standard, besides the fact that Qudelix capacity as a manufacturer has not been fully tested yet.
> 
> One major thing that I think BTR5 has is actually the OLED screen - it allows some settings (filters, gain, balance, etc) to be changed without using an app, which is much more convenient. If FiiO was able to find a way for user to store a few EQ setting on the BTR5 itself, that will be a major sale point.


Mid 2020 update - FiiO Control iOS app is version 1.0.3 and while “usable now”, the entire point of the app (EQ) is made useless because the Q5s does NOT remember EQ settings when powered off.

Maybe BTR5 designed with more thought so it does? *shrug* ES100 has no problem remembering settings.

IF only the ES100 had a decent case.. why do so many companies refuse to put on a good (and inexpensive) volume DIAL and MULTIPLE usable buttons?

HiBy W5 is one of the most idiotic designs ever with the “1 touch-sensitive button”.. I think it’s app half-worked and was very hard to use. There were some issues with setting recall as well.

BTR3/5 same issue as ES100 with small crappy buttons. Just less small.


----------



## manukmanohar

pstickne said:


> Mid 2020 update - FiiO Control iOS app is version 1.0.3 and while “usable now”, the entire point of the app (EQ) is made useless because the Q5s does NOT remember EQ settings when powered off.
> 
> Maybe BTR5 designed with more thought so it does? *shrug* ES100 has no problem remembering settings.
> 
> ...



HiBy W5 was such a big let-down ergonomics wise, I sold them off despite finding the SQ to be better than the other two. Fiio BTR5 doesn't support EQ over LDAC, but for aptx-HD it still works AFAIK.


----------



## pstickne (Aug 7, 2020)

manukmanohar said:


> Fiio BTR5 doesn't support EQ over LDAC, but for aptx-HD it still works AFAIK.


Does the BTR5 remember EQ settings after device power off?

The “forgetting settings” issue might be specific to certain devices..? They can be “set” on the Q5s, and it needs to be done manually on every power on  (The Q5s remembers other settings like filter selection.)


----------



## manukmanohar

pstickne said:


> Does the BTR5 remember EQ settings after device power off?
> 
> The “forgetting settings” issue might be specific to certain devices..? They can be “set” on the Q5s, and it needs to be done manually on every power on  (The Q5s remembers other settings like filter selection.)



I just tried it now after turning off the LDAC. Even after powering off and powering back, the EQ settings are still retained on BTR5, as it should be. (on Aptx HD)

This is surely a bug with the Q5S (Had a Q5 long back, which as far I can recollect didn't have this issue). Hopefully, Fiio fixes it soon


----------



## Sam L

Sadly, my Oppo ha-2 died. I carried it around with me to use along with my laptop and on occasion with my smartphone. 

Whould the qudelix be an alternative? How do you guys think the usb mode will compare?


----------



## Alberto01

Which receiver has deeper bass to your ears between the W3 and the UP2?

Which receiver has better mids to your ears between the W3 and the UP2?

Which receiver has better highs to your ears between the W3 and the UP2?


----------



## DB10

Hi everyone, I have been reading this thread for months... First of all I wish you are fine, due to COVID crisis, greetings from Spain!.

I have been using the ES100 for about a year with my CA Andromeda and loving it. Now the battery is almost dead and a need a replacement. I would like something that could be used in Bluetooth mode but also as USB Dac both in my Windows laptop and using a OTG cable in my phone. I have doubt if I should buy the Qudelix or the Fiio BTR5. @ClieOS and everyone that have tested them, what do you suggest me? Or should I buy a new ES100?. I use an Android phone.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## ClieOS

DB10 said:


> Hi everyone, I have been reading this thread for months... First of all I wish you are fine, due to COVID crisis, greetings from Spain!.
> 
> I have been using the ES100 for about a year with my CA Andromeda and loving it. Now the battery is almost dead and a need a replacement. I would like something that could be used in Bluetooth mode but also as USB Dac both in my Windows laptop and using a OTG cable in my phone. I have doubt if I should buy the Qudelix or the Fiio BTR5. @ClieOS and everyone that have tested them, what do you suggest me? Or should I buy a new ES100?. I use an Android phone.
> 
> Thanks in advance.



BTR5 will offer you as good an USB DAC as it is a BT adapter, while 5K has a really good EQ system - I'll suggest you pick the one with feature that most appeal to you.


----------



## Ocelitgol

DB10 said:


> Hi everyone, I have been reading this thread for months... First of all I wish you are fine, due to COVID crisis, greetings from Spain!.
> 
> I have been using the ES100 for about a year with my CA Andromeda and loving it. Now the battery is almost dead and a need a replacement. I would like something that could be used in Bluetooth mode but also as USB Dac both in my Windows laptop and using a OTG cable in my phone. I have doubt if I should buy the Qudelix or the Fiio BTR5. @ClieOS and everyone that have tested them, what do you suggest me? Or should I buy a new ES100?. I use an Android phone.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


Personally, I think BTR5 and 5K already far surpassed ES100 (except the app aspect, but not far off). I'd say BTR5 if you're using USB DAC most of the time; it's really really good. IDK about 5K but they have EQ on LDAC if that's important to you. 
Side note: I'd say the BTR5 buttons are more tactile to press and easier to find without looking, and they have better build. 
Also, Shanling UP4's volume wheel is pretty addictive. But the other two win overall


----------



## IEManiac

ClieOS said:


> BTR5 will offer you as good an USB DAC as it is a BT adapter, while 5K has a really good EQ system - I'll suggest you pick the one with feature that most appeal to you.


Which of the two will put out more voltage to power 250 ohm cans single-ended?


----------



## DB10

Hi,


ClieOS said:


> BTR5 will offer you as good an USB DAC as it is a BT adapter, while 5K has a really good EQ system - I'll suggest you pick the one with feature that most appeal to you.





Ocelitgol said:


> Personally, I think BTR5 and 5K already far surpassed ES100 (except the app aspect, but not far off). I'd say BTR5 if you're using USB DAC most of the time; it's really really good. IDK about 5K but they have EQ on LDAC if that's important to you.
> Side note: I'd say the BTR5 buttons are more tactile to press and easier to find without looking, and they have better build.
> Also, Shanling UP4's volume wheel is pretty addictive. But the other two win overall



thanks for all your help @ClieOS and @Ocelitgol, difficult decision for me, I would appreciate a good EQ system and my smartphone does not support LDAC, I would use mainly APTX. Another aspect is that here, in Spain, the Fiio is easy to buy, it is available in Amazon. 

I would use it with my CA Andromeda, do you think is a good combination?. Do you think that one of them (5K or Fiio) is better, due to the high Andromeda hiss problem in some DACs?.

Thanks again and all the best, I will tell you my decision and post my impressions, I am quite confused about one of them I should buy!.


----------



## ClieOS

IEManiac said:


> Which of the two will put out more voltage to power 250 ohm cans single-ended?



5K has a higher voltage output capability - but you need to understand that higher output generally means higher distortion / noise level as well (even if it might or might not reach audible level). This is why Qudelix advises user to keep output voltage setting on 1Vrms ('normal' setting) as much as possible.



DB10 said:


> I would use it with my CA Andromeda, do you think is a good combination?. Do you think that one of them (5K or Fiio) is better, due to the high Andromeda hiss problem in some DACs?.



They are just about the same quietness to my ears - then again, I don't have hiss-prone IEM to really tell any subtle difference they might have.


----------



## Ocelitgol (Aug 10, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> 5K has a higher voltage output capability - but you need to understand that higher output generally means higher distortion / noise level as well (even if it might or might not reach audible level). This is why Qudelix advises user to keep output voltage setting on 1Vrms ('normal' setting) as much as possible.



While you're explaining that, can you explain the gain setting on BTR5? Regarding pros and cons.
I would assume that iem only need low gain and save the high gain for demanding headphones?



DB10 said:


> Hi,
> 
> thanks for all your help @ClieOS and @Ocelitgol, difficult decision for me, I would appreciate a good EQ system and my smartphone does not support LDAC, I would use mainly APTX. Another aspect is that here, in Spain, the Fiio is easy to buy, it is available in Amazon.
> 
> ...



I don't think it will hiss with BTR5. You can check the specs also maybe some reviewers tested with their Andromeda as well.
If you're buying from Amazon, that's even more reason to try it out.


----------



## ClieOS

Ocelitgol said:


> While you're explaining that, can you explain the gain setting on BTR5? Regarding pros and cons.
> I would assume that iem only need low gain and save the high gain for demanding headphones?



The basic rule about gain setting on any audio gear is that you should start with the lowest, then move to the next level up if you can't get it loud enough.


----------



## ClieOS

List updated with Xduoo XP-2 Pro - another full sized design, completed with line-in and USB DAC function.


----------



## DB10

Thaks for all!!!
I will let you know and share my impressions when I have bought one of them, I am reviewing the availability and the cost in Spain, and I will download the 5K app.


----------



## hmscott

Has anyone tried the Creative BT-W3?  I had the BT-W2 released years ago, this one looks fully updated.

I was emailed about a new dongle from Creative built to dedicate to provide BT for PS4 / Nintendo Switch / PC:

"Enjoy wireless audio on your PS4™ or Nintendo Switch™ with BT-W3! Creative BT-W3 is a portable _Bluetooth_ audio transmitter equipped with the latest _Bluetooth_ version 5.0 and advanced audio codecs like aptX™ LL and aptX™ HD. With a simple plug-and-play functionality, you can easily enjoy high-quality _Bluetooth_ audio with your PS4™, Nintendo Switch™, PC, or Mac. "
https://us.creative.com/p/speakers/creative-bt-w3

I haven't tried it yet, but early on I used the predecessor the BT-W2, and this new revision looks like it's completely up to date and what I've been waiting for someone to provide - a cost effective all around update for BT on the Nintendo, PS4, and PC.

It's also available on Amazon, but make sure you click the right product option otherwise you'll get the years older W2... we want the W3 

Creative BT-W3 Bluetooth 5.0 USB-C Audio Transmitter, aptX LL and aptX HD, 3.5 mm Analog Mic for Voice Chat Support, Codec Indicator and Selection, Plug-and-Play for PS4, Nintendo Switch, PC, and Mac
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B089PYFLBN

I've been looking for an updated BT for my PC too, it's still on BT 4.1, worth a try


----------



## ClieOS

1MORE DH3001B added to the list


----------



## darkskip

Hi,
I am kind of lost with trying to get my gear wireless for active portable use, workout, running and such. Was looking into all the neckband/cable type solutions but looks like all have at best mixed reviews regarding SQ, hiss and signal strength. 
My priorities are freedom from cables and ease of use so that's why i'm a bit skeptic with adapters. do you think something like BTR1K or HIBY W3 with a short cable be a good solution for workout and running, or should I stick to BT cables like shure/mee etc.? 

If it makes any difference, IEMs are AAW AXH (5ba1dd) and an old Noble 3ba unit, source is phone with Spotify. 

Thanks in advance!


----------



## ballog (Aug 17, 2020)

@ClieOS Topping BC3 - a few people have been talking about this unit. I would be interesting if you could take a look and give us some of your impression about the technical aspects (same dac as the Fiio M6 & Shanling MO btw).


----------



## Shanling

ballog said:


> @ClieOS Topping BC3 - a few people have been talking about this unit. I would be interesting if you could take a look and give us some of your impression about the technical aspects (same dac as the Fiio M6 & Shanling MO btw).



Correction:

According to topping materials in your link, they use ESS ES9018Q2C, which is also used in Fiio M6.
But Shanling M0 is using ES9218P, so it's different chip.


----------



## ClieOS

ballog said:


> @ClieOS Topping BC3 - a few people have been talking about this unit. I would be interesting if you could take a look and give us some of your impression about the technical aspects (same dac as the Fiio M6 & Shanling MO btw).



It seems to be decently spec'ed, but otherwise nothing particularly special to note. I can see some people with older desktop DAC that doesn't have BT function might find use of it for its TOSlink output, otherwise an actual decent BT adapter (like those listed here in this thread) will be functionally better given BC3 doesn't has a mic.


----------



## Lurk650

I take it the 5K SQ is slightly better than the ES100, so not worth the "upgrade" if my ES100 is still working perfectly fine?


----------



## ClieOS

Lurk650 said:


> I take it the 5K SQ is slightly better than the ES100, so not worth the "upgrade" if my ES100 is still working perfectly fine?



If it is matter of 'need'',  then you don't have to; if it is a matter of 'want', then you are the only person that can answer it for yourself.


----------



## Luke Skywalker

ES100 sounds amazing with JH Lola using balanced cable, connected to iPhone by AAC Bluetooth btw


----------



## Lohb

Anywhere to buy the clear clip case for Fiio BTR5 ? Need a 2nd one.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> Anywhere to buy the clear clip case for Fiio BTR5 ? Need a 2nd one.



Don't think it was ever being sold separately, but you can probably contact FiiO directly if you need a 2nd one.


----------



## floeezy (Aug 27, 2020)

Hey guys,

I would like to know which Bluetooth DAC has the best sounding single-ended output:

Fiio Q5s
Fiio BTR3K

Thanks,

Florent

Edit: the DAC will be used with the KSE1200 earphone system, so I don't believe output power is an issue as I need to feed the signal into the KSA1200 specialized amplifier anyway.


----------



## fonkepala

floeezy said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I would like to know which Bluetooth DAC has the best sounding single-ended output:
> 
> ...



A bit OOT, but I'd highly recommend you have a look at the Qudelix 5K. I'm really really enjoying mine.
www.qudelix.com


----------



## floeezy

fonkepala said:


> A bit OOT, but I'd highly recommend you have a look at the Qudelix 5K. I'm really really enjoying mine.
> www.qudelix.com



Thanks for the reply! This has probably been covered many times, but how does SE output of the Qudelix 5K compare to the Fiio BTR3K?


----------



## fonkepala (Aug 27, 2020)

floeezy said:


> Thanks for the reply! This has probably been covered many times, but how does SE output of the Qudelix 5K compare to the Fiio BTR3K?



I don't have the BTR3K so no idea. But the SE output on the Qudelix works and sounds very well IMHO. It fits my needs. And the EQ implementation and app is marvelous. Way better than Fiio, I guess.

*edit: see here for BTR3k vs Qudelix:  https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the...lix-5k-impression-added.906655/#post-14951331

hope this helps.


----------



## rkw

floeezy said:


> I would like to know which Bluetooth DAC has the best sounding single-ended output:
> 
> Fiio Q5s
> Fiio BTR3K


Q5s is 4x price, 8x weight, 8x size of BTR3K. If it doesn't sound better, there is something very wrong with FiiO's product line.
Q5s is the size of a smartphone and in a different category from all the others in this thread.


----------



## floeezy (Aug 27, 2020)

rkw said:


> Q5s is 4x price, 8x weight, 8x size of BTR3K. If it doesn't sound better, there is something very wrong with FiiO's product line.
> Q5s is the size of a smartphone and in a different category from all the others in this thread.



Price does not necessarily correlate with sound quality. In the case of the Q5s, it has a lot more features and output power than the BTR3K, which could supposedly justify the 4x price; however, it is possible that the sound quality for easy-to-drive IEMs are very similar between the two DACs. Therefore, I wanted to check if anyone had heard the two. Either could work for my setup.


----------



## ClieOS

rkw said:


> Q5s is 4x price, 8x weight, 8x size of BTR3K. If it doesn't sound better, there is something very wrong with FiiO's product line.
> Q5s is the size of a smartphone and in a different category from all the others in this thread.



True on many level but the thing I'll pay most attention to is that whatever is chosen is going to feed the KSE1200's amp anyway, and therefore the real question is which one of the two is going to be better as a pure voltage source - the obvious answer is Q5s as it does offer a 1.8Vrms line-out and so it will have a cleaner signal going into KSE1200's amp. 



floeezy said:


> Edit: the DAC will be used with the KSE1200 earphone system, so I don't believe output power is an issue as I need to feed the signal into the KSA1200 specialized amplifier anyway.


----------



## floeezy (Aug 27, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> True on many level but the thing I'll pay most attention to is that whatever is chosen is going to feed the KSE1200's amp anyway, and therefore the real question is which one of the two is going to be better as a pure voltage source - the obvious answer is Q5s as it does offer a 1.8Vrms line-out and so it will have a cleaner signal going into KSE1200's amp.



Thanks for the feedback ClieOS. I remember someone saying that he would rank the importance of audio components on the final sound quality in the following order:

1. Headphone / IEM / speaker
2. Amplifier
3. Amplifier section after the DAC
4. DAC
5. Source files, cables, etc.

If we agree with this assessment and consider your comment on having the cleanest signal possible, what Bluetooth receiving DAC/amp would you recommend for the KSE1200 earphone system that is no bigger than the KSA1200 amplifier? The KSA1200 amplifier measures  93 × 59 × 21 mm.

Thank you so much.


----------



## floeezy (Aug 27, 2020)

I ended up going with the Fiio BTR3K as apparently high voltage line outs make the KSE1200's amp clip. Furthermore, from what I could gather, the SE performance of the BTR3K is only second to the W5, especially for low-power applications. Thanks for all the work compiling the comparisons ClieOS!


----------



## wwyjoe

Folks, has BT tech or receivers (such as 5K,BTR5, ES100 etc.) reach the same audiophile quality, if not better, than listening thru wired sources such as LG V60 or V50 phones? My music are lossless files, mostly ripped CD quality, and some MQA or high res 192khz encoded files.


----------



## Ocelitgol

wwyjoe said:


> Folks, has BT tech or receivers (such as 5K,BTR5, ES100 etc.) reach the same audiophile quality, if not better, than listening thru wired sources such as LG V60 or V50 phones? My music are lossless files, mostly ripped CD quality, and some MQA or high res 192khz encoded files.


can you hear the difference though?
in my opinion, you're fine with those phone unless you want the convenience of wireless-ish. Check the specs of those phones' dacs.


----------



## wwyjoe

I do have an LG V60 which sounds very good, but no experience with BT receivers. Am thinking of moving to other flagship phones and enjoy the wireless convenience, at the same time not lose or compromise sound quality if listening thru BT


----------



## Lohb

wwyjoe said:


> Folks, has BT tech or receivers (such as 5K,BTR5, ES100 etc.) reach the same audiophile quality, if not better, than listening thru wired sources such as LG V60 or V50 phones? My music are lossless files, mostly ripped CD quality, and some MQA or high res 192khz encoded files.


After getting a phone that streams redbook to LDAC with BTR5...I have to finally say yes...

May be my imagination, but there seems to be more microdetail across the board and extension up top vs aptX codec...I know its like splitting hairs between the 2, but it seems to be the case.


----------



## fonkepala

wwyjoe said:


> Folks, has BT tech or receivers (such as 5K,BTR5, ES100 etc.) reach the same audiophile quality, if not better, than listening thru wired sources such as LG V60 or V50 phones? My music are lossless files, mostly ripped CD quality, and some MQA or high res 192khz encoded files.



I don't have LG phones, but I have to say that I'm very happy with the Qudelix 5K. I couldn't perceive a difference in SQ while listening through the Qudelix on LDAC versus listening on my desktop rig (various dac/amps). YMMV.


----------



## Nalin

Got Shanling UP2 as I was tired of using AirPods Pro (air pressure). I have fair share of experience with ESS as I like the detailed sound it provide compared to Cirrus Logic we usually find in iPhones/MacBooks. But the thing that is common with all ESS (especially 9018) is that it has metallic mids. The mids doesn't sound natural which is not usually the case with Cirrus Logic. I am going to try something from AKM side, maybe that can provide the natural sound I am looking for. But I don't think any bluetooth adapter is providing option from that house.


----------



## Lurk650 (Aug 31, 2020)

Nalin said:


> Got Shanling UP2 as I was tired of using AirPods Pro (air pressure). I have fair share of experience with ESS as I like the detailed sound it provide compared to Cirrus Logic we usually find in iPhones/MacBooks. But the thing that is common with all ESS (especially 9018) is that it has metallic mids. The mids doesn't sound natural which is not usually the case with Cirrus Logic. I am going to try something from AKM side, maybe that can provide the natural sound I am looking for. But I don't think any bluetooth adapter is providing option from that house.


ES100 and BTR3K are both AK DACs

I agree on the 9018, which is why I sold my Pioneer 300R and Burson Conductor Air

I had the Shanling M0 which used the 9218p like the Quedelix 5K and didn't mind the sound on the Shanling, just didn't like the tiny player itself and wanted balanced


----------



## dkpaul

I ordered 5K based on the review. However, I wonder if anyone has had a chance to compare 5K with Deva Bluemini.


----------



## Cuebbing

Wanted to say thank you for the shirt clip recommendation.  I had bookmarked it and took my time ordering one.  It is marketed as an eye glasses holder/clip. For BT adapters I wasn't sure if it was going to make much of difference but now that I'm using it I like it.  Especially nice with t-shirts. Depending on the IEM & cable, even a light adapter like the ES100 can weigh down/flip over the collar on a t-shirt.  This clip allows you to "hang" the adapter anywhere, strong magnet.



ClieOS said:


> For those of you who use BT headphone adapter, here is one accessory that I strongly recommend - it is called ReadeREST on Amazon but you can find similar products on Aliexpress if you search "magnetic glasses holder". Instead of clipping your BT adapter on an uncomfortable / awkward position on your shirt, this allows you to clip your BT adapter on it with far less restriction on how you position the BT adapter.


----------



## ClieOS

Cuebbing said:


> Wanted to say thank you for the shirt clip recommendation...



I own the ReadeREST before I even have any BT adapter that needs it, so it definitely comes in very handy when I was looking for a way to get a BT adapter close to my chest but not straight to the shirt collar. Unfortunately this won't work for Qudelix 5K but I have a different recommendation for it, also added to the first post now.


----------



## dkpaul

ClieOS said:


> I own the ReadeREST before I even have any BT adapter that needs it, so it definitely comes in very handy when I was looking for a way to get a BT adapter close to my chest but not straight to the shirt collar. Unfortunately this won't work for Qudelix 5K but I have a different recommendation for it, also added to the first post now.


I'm sorry for asking a question off topic. do you think 5K would be able to drive HiFiman Ananda?


----------



## ClieOS

dkpaul said:


> I'm sorry for asking a question off topic. do you think 5K would be able to drive HiFiman Ananda?



By Ananda's spec, 5K should be able to drive it, especially with balanced configuration. How well is something I can't say for sure.


----------



## fonkepala

ClieOS said:


> I own the ReadeREST before I even have any BT adapter that needs it, so it definitely comes in very handy when I was looking for a way to get a BT adapter close to my chest but not straight to the shirt collar. Unfortunately this won't work for Qudelix 5K but I have a different recommendation for it, also added to the first post now.



Interesting to note that the reading glasses magnetic holder won't work with the 5K. With the access card holder (which you've added to the first post), I wonder if the metal bar that has to be glued to the 5K interferes with its strong BT signal?


----------



## ClieOS

fonkepala said:


> Interesting to note that the reading glasses magnetic holder won't work with the 5K. With the access card holder (which you've added to the first post), I wonder if the metal bar that has to be glued to the 5K interferes with its strong BT signal?



Depends on where you glue the metal to - I glued it to the shirt clip, which is already a piece of metal on its own, so it won't cause more interference. If you glue it to the front (which is all plastic), then probably it will have some negative effect


----------



## fonkepala

ClieOS said:


> Depends on where you glue the metal to - I glued it to the shirt clip, which is already a piece of metal on its own, so it won't cause more interference. If you glue it to the front (which is all plastic), then probably it will have some negative effect



Good point, thanks. I'll check it out. One more question: does the glue/adhesive tape appear to be easily removable? I'd hate if it leaves a residue upon removal.


----------



## ClieOS

fonkepala said:


> Good point, thanks. I'll check it out. One more question: does the glue/adhesive tape appear to be easily removable? I'd hate if it leaves a residue upon removal.



It is normal 3M double side foam tape, not impossible to remove cleanly, especially if you use a bit of adhesive remover / organic solvent. But if easy removal is a big concern to you, I'll recommend remove the included foam tape first and replace it with 3M Command foam tape, which is designed to be very easy to remove and generally leave no residue.


----------



## fonkepala

ClieOS said:


> It is normal 3M double side foam tape, not impossible to remove cleanly, especially if you use a bit of adhesive remover / organic solvent. But if easy removal is a big concern to you, I'll recommend remove the included foam tape first and replace it with 3M Command foam tape, which is designed to be very easy to remove and generally leave no residue.



Good idea re: the 3M Command tape. Thanks!


----------



## Lohb

Picked up a BTR5 for a friend off eBay UK at about 2/3s of retail...looked like my black retail model but on arrival, it has a silver border...could it be an earlier model that had issues or is it latest version after full black? Be interested in what people are receiving just now with BTR5s...


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 9, 2020)

Lohb said:


> Picked up a BTR5 for a friend off eBay UK at about 2/3s of retail...looked like my black retail model but on arrival, it has a silver border...could it be an earlier model that had issues or is it latest version after full black? Be interested in what people are receiving just now with BTR5s...



There are three different color version on BTR5 - full black (the original version), blue~purple-ish front/back with silver frame (the more expensive limited 'sky blue' edition) and the black front/back with silver frame (titanium edition).  They are all the same internally.


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 11, 2020)

nvm


----------



## Cuebbing

If you come across a shirt clip like the ReadeREST that works with the Qudelix 5k please let us know (I'll do the same).  I'd rather not glue/tape if I can avoid it.
I got the Qudelix 5k this week.  I wish the 2.5/3.5 plug faced down when clipped on my t-shirt collar.  With it facing up it puts the cable connection poking in your neck.  With the BTR5 removable clip I can turn the adapter around and face the plug down.




ClieOS said:


> I own the ReadeREST before I even have any BT adapter that needs it, so it definitely comes in very handy when I was looking for a way to get a BT adapter close to my chest but not straight to the shirt collar. Unfortunately this won't work for Qudelix 5K but I have a different recommendation for it, also added to the first post now.


----------



## 528068

Anyone here compared the dh1000/Sonata-iDSD-Plus to the 9038sg3?


----------



## ClieOS

TheRealestLad said:


> Anyone here compared the dh1000/Sonata-iDSD-Plus to the 9038sg3?



None is BT adapter?


----------



## 528068

ClieOS said:


> None is BT adapter?



You compared two of them to eachother?


----------



## ClieOS

TheRealestLad said:


> You compared two of them to eachother?



No, as I only have the E1DA but not the Tempotec. Besides, this is a thread dedicated for Hi-Res BT adapter.


----------



## Kalli (Oct 6, 2020)

Since I'm not sure if I want to drive headphones and/or IEMs with this, my question is, if there is a "no brainer" answer to "which one to choose"?

It's basically FiiO BTR5 vs Qudelix 5k?


----------



## ClieOS

Kalli said:


> Since I'm not sure if I want to drive headphones and/or IEMs with this, my question is, if there is a "no brainer" answer to "which one to choose"?
> 
> It's basically FiiO BTR5 vs Qudelix 5k?



The answer can be found on the first page, 2nd post.


----------



## Kalli

ClieOS said:


> The answer can be found on the first page, 2nd post.


Oh, thanks a lot. So sorry for not reading the 2nd post.


----------



## slex

ok, who benefited by plugging in ifi iematch balanced 2.5mm for all bluetooth receivers mentioned in this thread?


----------



## ClieOS

slex said:


> ok, who benefited by plugging in ifi iematch balanced 2.5mm for all bluetooth receivers mentioned in this thread?



Unless your IEM is super sensitive and will hiss with every source, I don't see a point of using IEMatch.


----------



## slex

ClieOS said:


> Unless your IEM is super sensitive and will hiss with every source, I don't see a point of using IEMatch.


Yes got it, returning it😄. I tried it  on 5K's High power mode, it blacken the sound but loss the dynamics.


----------



## iFi audio

ClieOS said:


> Unless your IEM is super sensitive and will hiss with every source, I don't see a point of using IEMatch.



Yes, it's a situational product


----------



## povidlo

ClieOS said:


> Unless your IEM is super sensitive and will hiss with every source, I don't see a point of using IEMatch.


Besides hiss, I find a benefit in using iematch (and earbuddy) when it comes to driving low impedance / low demand iems on powerful amps. A) By reducing overall volume, it gives more room on the knob for volume control. B) Some amps have R/L channel imbalance at low knob setting so getting into higher knob setting helps to alleviate that imbalance.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## ClieOS

povidlo said:


> Besides hiss, I find a benefit in using iematch (and earbuddy) when it comes to driving low impedance / low demand iems on powerful amps. A) By reducing overall volume, it gives more room on the knob for volume control. B) Some amps have R/L channel imbalance at low knob setting so getting into higher knob setting helps to alleviate that imbalance.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.



Agreed.  IEMatch has its use when it comes to IEM usage in general, hence I own both the 2.5mm  as well as the 3.5mm version of it.  Personally the best part of it is that it lower the sensitivity / loudness without changing the FR curve much. But for pairing with BT adapter, not so much as you won't get super powerful output like a full-sized amp nor channel imbalance (as BT adapter mostly use digital volume control).


----------



## iFi audio (Oct 9, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Agreed. IEMatch has its use when it comes to IEM usage in general, hence I own both the 2.5mm as well as the 3.5mm version of it. Personally the best part of it is that it lower the sensitivity / loudness without changing the FR curve much.



I wouldn't say it any better, thank you  



povidlo said:


> Some amps have R/L channel imbalance at low knob setting so getting into higher knob setting helps to alleviate that imbalance.



Yes, regular analogue volume pots might have slight imbalance early on.


----------



## Raketen (Oct 10, 2020)

The 3.5 mm is/was handy as a SE adapter too, for idiots like me who went all in on 3.5mm balanced cables only to see it disappear (and then years later reappear except different... though don't think I've seen a 3.5pro device yet).


----------



## iFi audio

Raketen said:


> The 3.5 mm is/was handy as a SE adapter too



You mean our iEMatch ?


----------



## mrnikt

Hi
I need your advice 
I would be buying a new BT toy .. I have a choice of BTR3K and ES 100MK2. The price is almost the same. Which is better, the pros / cons of each one based on your experience . It would be used with Marshall Major III corded headphones.


----------



## ClieOS

mrnikt said:


> Hi
> I need your advice
> I would be buying a new BT toy .. I have a choice of BTR3K and ES 100MK2. The price is almost the same. Which is better, the pros / cons of each one based on your experience . It would be used with Marshall Major III corded headphones.



Read the 2nd post.


----------



## mrnikt

@ClieOS I read it a thousand times  already. For me they both look almost the same ...that's why I ask users abot their experiece.


----------



## ballog

mrnikt said:


> @ClieOS I read it a thousand times  already. For me they both look almost the same ...that's why I ask users abot their experiece.


I've read the post some time ago. If i remember correctly Clieos pointed out that between the Btr3k and ES100 its the app for the latter which really makes a difference as well as EQ working over LDAC. Personnaly i bought the Fiio BTR3k a few weeks ago. I can only tell great things about the device (don't care for EQ) and i find the app good enough. Heck i even prefer the BTR3k over my Q5s - especially from the convenience point of view. The SQ is great and power is more than sufficient with my earbuds and headphones (low impedance only - such as Grado SR 325e, ATH M50). Excellent convenient device and very competent SQwise in a nutshell.


----------



## mrnikt

ballog said:


> (...)The SQ is great and power is more than sufficient with my earbuds and headphones (low impedance only - such as Grado SR 325e, ATH M50). Excellent convenient device and very competent SQwise in a nutshell.


Thanks a lot  I really don't care about EQ - cause I hardly ever use EQ, prefer pure music . And thanks for sharing Headphones types you testes BTR3K with. They have similar impedance to my Marshalls so there should be no problems with driving them.


----------



## Mouseman

mrnikt said:


> Thanks a lot  I really don't care about EQ - cause I hardly ever use EQ, prefer pure music . And thanks for sharing Headphones types you testes BTR3K with. They have similar impedance to my Marshalls so there should be no problems with driving them.


Have you considered the Quidelex 5k? I think it's still on sale at Amazon right now. I have it and the ES100, I prefer the 5k.


----------



## Kalli (Oct 15, 2020)

Mouseman said:


> Have you considered the Quidelex 5k? I think it's still on sale at Amazon right now. I have it and the ES100, I prefer the 5k.


Wasn't meant for me, but I'm in the same boat. 

Yes, I thought about that option as well. The 5K looks very impressive.
Does it have a built-in mic for phone calls and video chats and similar? And does it sound nice?
It is supposed to be used with the clip right? In a pocket the buttons would get clicked all day long by accident I guess.

EDIT:
It's basically the 5K (110€ + maybe shipping), the BTR5 (130€) or the ES100 (100€)
Or a TWS adapter like the TRN BT20S Pro or the Shure RMCE-TW1. Since it seems like most TWS adapters are not quite where I want it to be, I'm also looking for a BT adapter here.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Kalli said:


> Wasn't meant for me, but I'm in the same boat.
> 
> Yes, I thought about that option as well. The 5K looks very impressive.
> Does it have a built-in mic for phone calls and video chats and similar? And does it sound nice?
> ...


The 5K is a beast, with power output and SQ to rival mid-range full DAPs. You can lock the buttons to avoid accidental presses. It is much better than TWS adapters for now, although those are starting to get much better with the addition of dedicated amp sections. You don’t have to use the clip, it’s in my pocket all the time. But its clip is better than the ES100’s. As is its SQ. It has a mic too.
Haven’t heard the BTR5, everyone seems to like it, but the 5K’s app is something else with advanced EQ and a ton of controls.


----------



## slex

So far I'm satisfied using LDAC's 660-990 kbps with equalizer on 5K. Qudelix is "technical partner" with SONY LDAC  team although I dunno what it entails. Can you develop next iterations of LDAC , like LDAC Super HD?😄


----------



## ClieOS (Oct 15, 2020)

slex said:


> So far I'm satisfied using LDAC's 660-990 kbps with equalizer on 5K. Qudelix is "technical partner" with SONY LDAC  team although I dunno what it entails. Can you develop next iterations of LDAC , like LDAC Super HD?😄



I can't say in 100% certainty, but I have reason to believe Qudelix might have help to develop the LDAC's SDK kit for Qualcomm QCC5xxx series, meaning they help to port LDAC into QCC5xxx firmware.

The current BT codec is limited by the BT5.0 bandwidth. Until we have BT5.2 (which should in theory double the current bandwidth), there is no realistic way to improve BT codec.


----------



## Kalli (Oct 15, 2020)

monsieurfromag3 said:


> The 5K is a beast, with power output and SQ to rival mid-range full DAPs. You can lock the buttons to avoid accidental presses. It is much better than TWS adapters for now, although those are starting to get much better with the addition of dedicated amp sections. You don’t have to use the clip, it’s in my pocket all the time. But its clip is better than the ES100’s. As is its SQ. It has a mic too.
> Haven’t heard the BTR5, everyone seems to like it, but the 5K’s app is something else with advanced EQ and a ton of controls.


Ye, the TWS out there right now aren't convincing. The upcoming FiiO UTWS3 may be worth the wait though.

EDIT: If I decide to go with a BT adapter, instead of TWS, the Qudelix 5K it is?


----------



## Lohb

When BT5.2 drops, could they not just transmit lossless point-to-point like wifidirect ?


----------



## fonkepala

Kalli said:


> Ye, the TWS out there right now aren't convincing. The upcoming FiiO UTWS3 may be worth the wait though.
> 
> EDIT: If I decide to go with a BT adapter, instead of TWS, the Qudelix 5K it is?



I wholeheartedly recommend the Qudelix 5K. Very happy with mine and easily my best audio purchase this challenging year.


----------



## Mehran (Oct 19, 2020)

I recieved the 5k today and I wanted to share my initial impression of them. I already love it . Amazing little thing . I also have the Btr5 , but I enjoy this more, the sound as many have stated is more analogue and musical IMO . The app is great , it has a nice form factor . The BT connection is far better too . Although the soundstage is better on the Btr5 I think .


----------



## LupusWolf

Which would you say have the best battery life for powering something like T50rps on the 3.5mm unbalanced connection? The UP4 claims 15 hrs on SE while the ES100 and UP4 claims a range thats similar, but that's not helpful when comparing to each other. Would just like to know the UP4 batteries to complete the comparisons on your review.


----------



## Lohb

LupusWolf said:


> Which would you say have the best battery life for powering something like T50rps on the 3.5mm unbalanced connection? The UP4 claims 15 hrs on SE while the ES100 and UP4 claims a range thats similar, but that's not helpful when comparing to each other. Would just like to know the UP4 batteries to complete the comparisons on your review.


T50s are relatively very battery hungry now vs newer planars. You'd not get 1/4 of above estimates I'd guess.


----------



## peter123

LupusWolf said:


> Which would you say have the best battery life for powering something like T50rps on the 3.5mm unbalanced connection? The UP4 claims 15 hrs on SE while the ES100 and UP4 claims a range thats similar, but that's not helpful when comparing to each other. Would just like to know the UP4 batteries to complete the comparisons on your review.



Iirc the ES100 couldn't power the T50RP to normal listing level. It's been a long time though so I'll check again tomorrow. 

For the record my T50RP are modded.


----------



## ClieOS

LupusWolf said:


> Which would you say have the best battery life for powering something like T50rps on the 3.5mm unbalanced connection? The UP4 claims 15 hrs on SE while the ES100 and UP4 claims a range thats similar, but that's not helpful when comparing to each other. Would just like to know the UP4 batteries to complete the comparisons on your review.



Testing battery life is tedious work, and thus why I don't do it to every BT adapter in the list unless I personally like to know about a particular device's  battery life. UP4, unfortunately, is one of the BT adapter that I don't have an interest to know its battery life.


----------



## imeem

what happens if i don't want to use the app, or i can't download it due to old phone?


----------



## ClieOS

imeem said:


> what happens if i don't want to use the app, or i can't download it due to old phone?



Which BT adapter are we talking here? If it is Shanling, you won't miss much at all. For FiiO, you will lose a bit of fine tuning in setting but otherwise not a problem. For Hiby, you will lose the ability to do OTA update but otherwise also not much else. For EarStudio E100, you won't be able to fine tuning all the setting, which isn't optimal but basic function is available nonetheless. For Qudelix 5K, app is a must. Not able to use 5K app will be like losing half of its functionality.


----------



## imeem (Oct 26, 2020)

ClieOS said:


> Which BT adapter are we talking here? If it is Shanling, you won't miss much at all. For FiiO, you will lose a bit of fine tuning in setting but otherwise not a problem. For Hiby, you will lose the ability to do OTA update but otherwise also not much else. For EarStudio E100, you won't be able to fine tuning all the setting, which isn't optimal but basic function is available nonetheless. For Qudelix 5K, app is a must. Not able to use 5K app will be like losing half of its functionality.



thanks. i haven't decided which bluetooth receiver yet, but sounds like Qudelix 5K is definitely out for me.

Also, does any of these receivers support line out, or only headphone out?


----------



## ClieOS (Oct 27, 2020)

imeem said:


> Also, does any of these receivers support line out, or only headphone out?



Headphone-out only.

P/S: almost forgot, YLM B2 does offer LO.


----------



## fsi22

2 questions. Does the es100 support equalizer in dac mode?

I have an aptx ll transmitter which I use for tv, with the 5k not supporting aptx ll, am I able to use it?


----------



## rkw

fsi22 said:


> 2 questions. Does the es100 support equalizer in dac mode?
> 
> I have an aptx ll transmitter which I use for tv, with the 5k not supporting aptx ll, am I able to use it?


But the ES100 doesn't support aptX LL either.


----------



## fsi22

rkw said:


> But the ES100 doesn't support aptX LL either.


Ah, didn't know that. thank you.


----------



## ClieOS

fsi22 said:


> 2 questions. Does the es100 support equalizer in dac mode?
> 
> I have an aptx ll transmitter which I use for tv, with the 5k not supporting aptx ll, am I able to use it?




Answer to the first question is yes, but you need to connect it to the app if you want to make any change. If you are using it with a PC, it is probably easier to use the EQ on the PC instead.

aptX LL should be backward compatible to regular aptX. So if the receiver's end doesn't support aptX LL, you should still get aptX, just not as low a latency as it can be.


----------



## fsi22

ClieOS said:


> Answer to the first question is yes, but you need to connect it to the app if you want to make any change. If you are using it with a PC, it is probably easier to use the EQ on the PC instead.
> 
> aptX LL should be backward compatible to regular aptX. So if the receiver's end doesn't support aptX LL, you should still get aptX, just not as low a latency as it can be.



Thanks, latency on aptx and hd is noticeable.

For my use case, looks like fiio is my option, was very tempted by the app for the 5k.


----------



## fsi22 (Nov 3, 2020)

@ClieOS  Using an empire ears iem ( Valkyrie, 3 ohm impedance ) on the btr5 and btr3k, The 2.5mm balanced is noticeably different in the sub bass area, I can hear and feel the difference. What do you think is the cause? The sub bass is more textured and not as overpowering, to me, it's a more enjoyable experience.

Edit- After more testing. One huge drawback is it's distorting and clipping closer to maximum volume. I also found that if I run btr3k through my Odac/objective amp, I'm getting much cleaner output all the way and that it sounds alot more like the balanced out on the btr3k.


----------



## ClieOS

fsi22 said:


> @ClieOS  Using an empire ears iem ( Valkyrie, 3 ohm impedance ) on the btr5 and btr3k, The 2.5mm balanced is noticeably different in the sub bass area, I can hear and feel the difference. What do you think is the cause? The sub bass is more textured and not as overpowering, to me, it's a more enjoyable experience.
> 
> Edit- After more testing. One huge drawback is it's distorting and clipping closer to maximum volume. I also found that if I run btr3k through my Odac/objective amp, I'm getting much cleaner output all the way and that it sounds alot more like the balanced out on the btr3k.



A 3 ohm impedance IEM is just about close to shorting out the output of the source, and that will cause a lot of currant draw and thus will stressing the output circuit a lot - by what you described, that seems to be the case. The more available current from the amp's output, the better the IEM will sound - as it means that the amp get less stressed out by the IEM's low impedance. With all common sense, 3 ohm is a ridiculously low impedance by any headphone's standard (*remember, loudspeaker transducer are usually designed to be ether 4 or 8 ohm, and they need dedicated power amp to drive). I know some would probably go as far as to say the IEM designer isn't doing a good enough job on designing the crossover circuit (as there are certainly way to design the crossover to maintain the same sound but have a sensible impedance range).


----------



## fsi22

ClieOS said:


> A 3 ohm impedance IEM is just about close to shorting out the output of the source, and that will cause a lot of currant draw and thus will stressing the output circuit a lot - by what you described, that seems to be the case. The more available current from the amp's output, the better the IEM will sound - as it means that the amp get less stressed out by the IEM's low impedance. With all common sense, 3 ohm is a ridiculously low impedance by any headphone's standard (*remember, loudspeaker transducer are usually designed to be ether 4 or 8 ohm, and they need dedicated power amp to drive). I know some would probably go as far as to say the IEM designer isn't doing a good enough job on designing the crossover circuit (as there are certainly way to design the crossover to maintain the same sound but have a sensible impedance range).



Thank you. You're spot on. Would it be safe to stick with 3.5mm only with these iem? They scale really well with the O2/Odac and btr3k/5.


----------



## ClieOS

fsi22 said:


> Thank you. You're spot on. Would it be safe to stick with 3.5mm only with these iem? They scale really well with the O2/Odac and btr3k/5.



They should be fine.


----------



## aaalexx

ClieOS said:


> No, as I only have the E1DA but not the Tempotec. Besides, this is a thread dedicated for Hi-Res BT adapter.


Hi, I know that the E1DA is not a BT adapter, but is its sound really better than for example the BTR5/BTR3K/Qudelix 5K ?
I mean, is the bluetooth really mean a loss in term of quality sound ?


----------



## ClieOS

aaalexx said:


> Hi, I know that the E1DA is not a BT adapter, but is its sound really better than for example the BTR5/BTR3K/Qudelix 5K ?
> I mean, is the bluetooth really mean a loss in term of quality sound ?



A properly driven E1DA (*power wise, as not every smartphone can power E1DA to its best) is exceptionally good sounding. I'll say better than any BT adapter I owns, though perhaps not to a night-and-day level of difference. It is not to say that it must be that result caused by Bluetooth's loss of SQ over wireless transmission but it might also be the case that E1DA is designed to be less compromised power-wise (as BT adapter needs to balance its design between power and battery life but E1DA doesn't have such restriction). 

In term of ultimate SQ, I'll say E1DA has a small but noticeable edge. But as far as convenience goes, I definitely use more BT adapter than E1DA in everyday listening as I still find BT adapter more than good enough to forgo carrying around a long cable with E1DA.


----------



## peter123

ClieOS said:


> A properly driven E1DA (*power wise, as not every smartphone can power E1DA to its best) is exceptionally good sounding. I'll say better than any BT adapter I owns, though perhaps not to a night-and-day level of difference. It is not to say that it must be that result caused by Bluetooth's loss of SQ over wireless transmission but it might also be the case that E1DA is designed to be less compromised power-wise (as BT adapter needs to balance its design between power and battery life but E1DA doesn't have such restriction).
> 
> In term of ultimate SQ, I'll say E1DA has a small but noticeable edge. But as far as convenience goes, I definitely use more BT adapter than E1DA in everyday listening as I still find BT adapter more than good enough to forgo carrying around a long cable with E1DA.



^^ this mirrors my experience exactly


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Does the BTR3 have any advantage over W3? Thinking about buying one of these 2


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Does the BTR3 have any advantage over W3? Thinking about buying one of these 2



BTR3? No. 
BTR3K? Very much yes.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> BTR3? No.
> BTR3K? Very much yes.



other than gimmicky balanced output ?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> other than gimmicky balanced output ?



BTR3K is fundamentally a very different (and much better) sounding BT adapter than BTR3, even on just the 3.5mm output alone.


----------



## aaalexx

ClieOS said:


> A properly driven E1DA (*power wise, as not every smartphone can power E1DA to its best) is exceptionally good sounding. I'll say better than any BT adapter I owns, though perhaps not to a night-and-day level of difference. It is not to say that it must be that result caused by Bluetooth's loss of SQ over wireless transmission but it might also be the case that E1DA is designed to be less compromised power-wise (as BT adapter needs to balance its design between power and battery life but E1DA doesn't have such restriction).
> 
> In term of ultimate SQ, I'll say E1DA has a small but noticeable edge. But as far as convenience goes, I definitely use more BT adapter than E1DA in everyday listening as I still find BT adapter more than good enough to forgo carrying around a long cable with E1DA.



Thank's for the detailed answer !
I'm looking for a replacement of my lost BTR3.
I usually used it during the commute in bluetooth mode, then in Dac mode at work.
That's why I'm looking at E1DA.
With one of those BTR3K/5K it would be a great combo


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> BTR3K is fundamentally a very different (and much better) sounding BT adapter than BTR3, even on just the 3.5mm output alone.



and how does Hiby W3 compares to BTR3K?


----------



## Lohb

nabuhodonozor said:


> and how does Hiby W3 compares to BTR3K?


Just head to BTR5 or Qedelix and save the guesswork if you can afford them.


----------



## Lohb (Nov 11, 2020)

peter123 said:


> ^^ this mirrors my experience exactly


I found BTR5 in the centre ground between the amazing imaging/microdetail on 9038S and body/weight/heft of E1DA...BTR5 is no slouch when wired up the same as those 2...I notice the dirtier fuzzier imaging going from  9038s or BTR5 to E1DA....
I'll wait for the next lot of E1 stuff - even their 3rd revision of 9038S would not lock the system audio on Mac if a youtube vid started in background it would blend the Audirvana+ music with youtube...All my other DACs did not have that problem.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Lohb said:


> Just head to BTR5 or Qedelix and save the guesswork if you can afford them.


BTR5 is like double the price of BTR3K


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> and how does Hiby W3 compares to BTR3K?



BTR3K offers the same level (if not slightly better) of performance while having extra feature. The only upper hand W3 has is its UAT support, which unfortunately doesn't really work in real world scenario. In short, I don't see any particular good reaon to pick W3 over BTR3K unless you really want to save a few dollars.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> BTR3K offers the same level (if not slightly better) of performance while having extra feature. The only upper hand W3 has is its UAT support, which unfortunately doesn't really work in real world scenario. In short, I don't see any particular good reaon to pick W3 over BTR3K unless you really want to save a few dollars.



That extra feature being balanced output ? Don't think I'd use it anyway so guess picking W3 would be better option


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> That extra feature being balanced output ? Don't think I'd use it anyway so guess picking W3 would be better option



...as well as an actually usable app that allows fine tuning.


----------



## aaalexx

Finally ordered BTR3k, 46€ (and E1DA too, thank's 11.11)


----------



## Lohb

Anyone having their BTR5 stopping working with Hiby app OTG ?Trying to see if its recent Android update or hiby update that has broken the link.


----------



## sebek

BTR5 used as a simple LDAC bluetooth and on the unbalanced output I think it is really only at 50% of its potential. Connecting it to my smartphone with FiiO LT-TC1 and with headphones on the balanced output is incredible. 

Is the balanced output much better than the unbalanced output in the BTR3K too? 

Would it make any sense to take the BTR3K as a second device as well? Or rather something different like E1DA? 

(bluetooth cares little, I'm not using it anymore. the sound quality in wired mode is too much better)


----------



## peter123

sebek said:


> BTR5 used as a simple LDAC bluetooth and on the unbalanced output I think it is really only at 50% of its potential. Connecting it to my smartphone with FiiO LT-TC1 and with headphones on the balanced output is incredible.
> 
> Is the balanced output much better than the unbalanced output in the BTR3K too?
> 
> ...



Well, if you don't plan to use it as a Bluetooth adapter I wouldn't get a Bluetooth adapter  

The E1DA 9038s would be a better choice imo.


----------



## ClieOS

sebek said:


> BTR5 used as a simple LDAC bluetooth and on the unbalanced output I think it is really only at 50% of its potential. Connecting it to my smartphone with FiiO LT-TC1 and with headphones on the balanced output is incredible.
> 
> Is the balanced output much better than the unbalanced output in the BTR3K too?
> 
> ...



Not sure what you mean by 'simple LDAC Bluetooth' - it is the same LDAC like others and nothing particular simpler (or more complex). It does however only use one of the DAC/amp chip on the 3.5mm to save power, same as Qudelix 5K.

BTR5K uses both DAC/amp chips on 3.5mm as well as 2.5mm output. They can afford to do that because the AKM chips in BTR3K consume much less power than the ESS chips in BTR5. Of course, BTR3K also output less power than BTR5 as a result. However, using both DAC/amp chips in BTR3K all the time does mean that the difference between both output is relatively smaller than that of BTR5. Regardless of output power, I'll say both BTR3K output are almost as good sound as BTR5 2.5mm, as long as the extra power is not needed.

However, I do agree with @peter123 that it makes little sense to get a BT adapter just to use its wired connection. E1DA 9038s is indeed an excellent choice if you are only using balanced headphone, otherwise Audrect Beam 2 is a very good option for both balanced and unbalanced output.


----------



## sebek

ClieOS said:


> Not sure what you mean by 'simple LDAC Bluetooth' - it is the same LDAC like others and nothing particular simpler (or more complex). It does however only use one of the DAC/amp chip on the 3.5mm to save power, same as Qudelix 5K.
> 
> BTR5K uses both DAC/amp chips on 3.5mm as well as 2.5mm output. They can afford to do that because the AKM chips in BTR3K consume much less power than the ESS chips in BTR5. Of course, BTR3K also output less power than BTR5 as a result. However, using both DAC/amp chips in BTR3K all the time does mean that the difference between both output is relatively smaller than that of BTR5. Regardless of output power, I'll say both BTR3K output are almost as good sound as BTR5 2.5mm, as long as the extra power is not needed.
> 
> However, I do agree with @peter123 that it makes little sense to get a BT adapter just to use its wired connection. E1DA 9038s is indeed an excellent choice if you are only using balanced headphone, otherwise Audrect Beam 2 is a very good option for both balanced and unbalanced output.


I asked because I read from someone that BTR3K would sound even better than BTR5.

A Bluetooth device still makes sense even if you don't use Bluetooth, when wired it offers sound quality that with other devices in the same price range you would never get.


----------



## ClieOS

sebek said:


> A Bluetooth device still makes sense even if you don't use Bluetooth, when wired _*it offers sound quality that with other devices in the same price range you would never get*_.



Hence why it doesn't make sense, because it doesn't.


----------



## sebek

ClieOS said:


> Hence why it doesn't make sense, because it doesn't.


English is not my language so maybe I can't make myself understood. 

I got my BTR5 not because it had bluetooth, I didn't care, but because I had read from several users here on headfi and also on reddit that in wired mode and balanced output it had a sound quality comparable to 400-500 euro daps. 

I didn't know about e1da yet and at 119 € - the price paid for the BTR5 - I didn't know anything else that could offer such sound quality. 

it doesn't seem strange to me to buy a bluetooth device if you know that with a wired connection it improves a lot and get to offer a really high sound quality to get which you would have to spend a lot more.


----------



## ClieOS

sebek said:


> English is not my language so maybe I can't make myself understood.
> 
> I got my BTR5 not because it had bluetooth, I didn't care, but because I had read from several users here on headfi and also on reddit that in wired mode and balanced output it had a sound quality comparable to 400-500 euro daps.
> 
> ...



As far as BT adapter goes, BTR5 definitely has one of the best USB DAC function, though to say it has the same performance as a 400~500 Euro DAP might be pushing it a bit, at least IMO. But as long as you are enjoying it, I guess it doesn't matter.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Is it true that Hiby W3 was discontinued ?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Is it true that Hiby W3 was discontinued ?



Yes and no. 

Yes in the sense that W3 is in the process of upgrading to W3S (apparently 'S' stands for Sabre). No in the sense that the major difference between W3 and W3S is that the W3S will be using a new SoC (QCC5121) instead of the older CSR8675 found in W3 - however, we will still see the same DAC/amp chip (AKM4377) on W3S so it is unlikely we will see any major difference in SQ. QCC5121 is a more powerful SoC so we might see improvement in BT connection stability, or even new features like ANC and EQ (though it is worth knowing that Hiby didn't dedicate much effort to its BT adapters / app in the past so they might not bother bring new features at all, even though the new SoC might be capable of them). At this point the safer assumption is that this upgrade might be more of a response to Qualcomm phasing out CSR8675 as we also see FiiO has suddenly retired CSR8675 from its Q5s and replacing it with QCC5124 in its Q5s Type-C


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> Yes and no.
> 
> Yes in the sense that W3 is in the process of upgrading to W3S (apparently 'S' stands for Sabre). No in the sense that the major difference between W3 and W3S is that the W3S will be using a new SoC (QCC5121) instead of the older CSR8675 found in W3 - however, we will still see the same DAC/amp chip (AKM4377) on W3S so it is unlikely we will see any major difference in SQ. QCC5121 is a more powerful SoC so we might see improvement in BT connection stability, or even new features like ANC and EQ (though it is worth knowing that Hiby didn't dedicate much effort to its BT adapters / app in the past so they might not bother bring new features at all, even though the new SoC might be capable of them). At this point the safer assumption is that this upgrade might be more of a response to Qualcomm phasing out CSR8675 as we also see FiiO has suddenly retired CSR8675 from its Q5s and replacing it with QCC5124 in its Q5s Type-C



Will it be released this year ? Wonder if price stays the same. Still buying BTR3K after your recommendation


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Will it be released this year ? Wonder if price stays the same. Still buying BTR3K after your recommendation



I didn't see any actual marketing on the new W3S anywhere, but it can be bought from Hiby's Taobao site already (*I have confirmed it is indeed the W3S with its Taobao customer service). It is only priced a few dollar higher than the old W3 price tag. Don't really know why they didn't bother to announce it, though maybe they are waiting for other resellers to clear out their old W3 stock before making a buzz.


----------



## Lohb

Balanced out to a portable balanced tube amp should not fry BTR5 or the tube amp right... ? I know it's technically double-amping...just curious of what a tube veneer sounds like on top of BTR5...


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> Balanced out to a portable balanced tube amp should not fry BTR5 or the tube amp right... ? I know it's technically double-amping...just curious of what a tube veneer sounds like on top of BTR5...



You are right - it is double amping and shouldn't harm the BTR5, as long as you use the correct inter-connecting cable.


----------



## mrnikt

Finally I decided to BTR3K. Thanks all of you for sharing opinions.


----------



## Lurk650

I jumped on a cyber monday deal for the Q5K last week, noticeable improvement over the ES100 for sure


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Any devices on the horizon with LC3 codec support?


----------



## povidlo

nabuhodonozor said:


> Any devices on the horizon with LC3 codec support?


----------



## nabuhodonozor

povidlo said:


>



Robby will support LC3 ? Cool!


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Any devices on the horizon with LC3 codec support?



LC3 will be introduced alongside BT5.2. So far we are still in BT5.0 and in the slow process of migrating to BT5.1. While there are already a handful of BT5.2 devices around, I think we are still a year or two before major adoption (*remember, you need both the source and the receiver to support it). In any case, LC3, while claimed to be better than SBC, is unlikely going to be better than hi-res codec such as aptx HD or LDAC.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> LC3 will be introduced alongside BT5.2. So far we are still in BT5.0 and in the slow process of migrating to BT5.1. While there are already a handful of BT5.2 devices around, I think we are still a year or two before major adoption (*remember, you need both the source and the receiver to support it). In any case, LC3, while claimed to be better than SBC, is unlikely going to be better than hi-res codec such as aptx HD or LDAC.



I've read that they promise LDAC type quality ,but maybe it's just marketing blabing


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> I've read that they promise LDAC type quality ,but maybe it's just marketing blabing



The situation is a bit more complicated.

LC3 codec is supposed to be just as good as SBC but only using half the data, meaning you can get a more stable connection (less data needed) with the same quality as SBC or you can get better sound quality if you are using the same amount of data. However, SBC is not inherently a bad sounding codec - it has its limit because often the manufacturer limits how much data / compression rate SBC can use (for example, many phone manufacturer internally limit SBC to 128kbps while SBC, at least on theory, can go to 320kbps and sound as good as aptX). What LC3 does is really more on the side of being a more efficient codec with proper scaling, something SBC doesn't have (*SBC doesn't scale at all). So as far as what we can tell on early LC3 spec, it seems LC3 will be a major competitor to aptX and AAC, but it doesn't have the technicality of Hi-res codec.

However, there is a special LC3 sub-codec called LC3plus - this is actually the LC3 equivalent of aptX HD / LDAC / LHDC. Unlike LC3, which is more of a red book 16/44.1 codec, LC3plus is 24/96. But there is a catch - unlike LC3, which is going to be a mandatory implementation on BT5.2 onward and likely going to replace SBC in the long term, LC3plus is an optional implementation just like aptX HD / LDAC / LHDC. Also, whether it actually offers any better quality to the existing Hi-res codec is still no clear.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> The situation is a bit more complicated.
> 
> LC3 codec is supposed to be just as good as SBC but only using half the data, meaning you can get a more stable connection (less data needed) with the same quality as SBC or you can get better sound quality if you are using the same amount of data. However, SBC is not inherently a bad sounding codec - it has its limit because often the manufacturer limits how much data / compression rate SBC can use (for example, many phone manufacturer internally limit SBC to 128kbps while SBC, at least on theory, can go to 320kbps and sound as good as aptX). What LC3 does is really more on the side of being a more efficient codec with proper scaling, something SBC doesn't have (*SBC doesn't scale at all). So as far as what we can tell on early LC3 spec, it seems LC3 will be a major competitor to aptX and AAC, but it doesn't have the technicality of Hi-res codec.
> 
> However, there is a special LC3 sub-codec called LC3plus - this is actually the LC3 equivalent of aptX HD / LDAC / LHDC. Unlike LC3, which is more of a red book 16/44.1 codec, LC3plus is 24/96. But there is a catch - unlike LC3, which is going to be a mandatory implementation on BT5.2 onward and likely going to replace SBC in the long term, LC3plus is an optional implementation just like aptX HD / LDAC / LHDC. Also, whether it actually offers any better quality to the existing Hi-res codec is still no clear.



Interesting. Wonder if with release of LC3 we will see new aptx/LDAC codecs. Guess it all depends on how good tha LC3plus will be


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> The situation is a bit more complicated.
> 
> LC3 codec is supposed to be just as good as SBC but only using half the data, meaning you can get a more stable connection (less data needed) with the same quality as SBC or you can get better sound quality if you are using the same amount of data. However, SBC is not inherently a bad sounding codec - it has its limit because often the manufacturer limits how much data / compression rate SBC can use (for example, many phone manufacturer internally limit SBC to 128kbps while SBC, at least on theory, can go to 320kbps and sound as good as aptX). What LC3 does is really more on the side of being a more efficient codec with proper scaling, something SBC doesn't have (*SBC doesn't scale at all). So as far as what we can tell on early LC3 spec, it seems LC3 will be a major competitor to aptX and AAC, but it doesn't have the technicality of Hi-res codec.
> 
> However, there is a special LC3 sub-codec called LC3plus - this is actually the LC3 equivalent of aptX HD / LDAC / LHDC. Unlike LC3, which is more of a red book 16/44.1 codec, LC3plus is 24/96. But there is a catch - unlike LC3, which is going to be a mandatory implementation on BT5.2 onward and likely going to replace SBC in the long term, LC3plus is an optional implementation just like aptX HD / LDAC / LHDC. Also, whether it actually offers any better quality to the existing Hi-res codec is still no clear.


I can always tell when connection has reverted to SBC though, it’s the only codec I find to sound properly bad, even in good transmission conditions, it’s like it wasn’t optimized for audio. aptX just seem to sound better at equivalent rate.


----------



## Lohb

monsieurfromag3 said:


> I can always tell when connection has reverted to SBC though, it’s the only codec I find to sound properly bad, even in good transmission conditions, it’s like it wasn’t optimized for audio. aptX just seem to sound better at equivalent rate.


Yip, Amazon FireTV unfortunately uses it...SBC it's bad...I can also hear apt-X/LDAC difference....LDAC rocks !


----------



## stook2001

Hi Folks, fantastic information in this thread.  Many thanks to the OP for consolidating all of this here.  Can anyone provide some feedback about call/mic quality on the Quedelix 5k, Fiio BTR5, Fiio BTR3k, and ES100 Mk2?  I am reasonably sure that any of these devices would work very well for my music needs but I don't have a clear sense of how these are differentiated in terms of mic quality.  I plan to use with IEMs both with and without inline mics.

Separately, just to confirm, the Eq functions in these 3 apps will work on iphone, correct?  Pretty sure, yes but wanted to double check.


----------



## rkw

stook2001 said:


> Can anyone provide some feedback about call/mic quality on the Quedelix 5k, Fiio BTR5, Fiio BTR3k, and ES100 Mk2?  I am reasonably sure that any of these devices would work very well for my music needs but I don't have a clear sense of how these are differentiated in terms of mic quality.  I plan to use with IEMs both with and without inline mics.


The ES100 does not support inline mics (the others do). The call quality of the built-in mic is highly dependent on positioning the device to pick up your voice. Obviously it would work better when the device is clipped to your collar rather than your belt.


----------



## stook2001

rkw said:


> The ES100 does not support inline mics (the others do). The call quality of the built-in mic is highly dependent on positioning the device to pick up your voice. Obviously it would work better when the device is clipped to your collar rather than your belt.



Right.  Any chance that you have compared the mic quality under comparable conditions (ie. assuming the device is mounted in a reasonable location like ones collar or shirt pocket, etc)?  Should I have the expectation that it will be comparable to the quality of an inline wired mic?


----------



## rkw

stook2001 said:


> Right.  Any chance that you have compared the mic quality under comparable conditions (ie. assuming the device is mounted in a reasonable location like ones collar or shirt pocket, etc)?  Should I have the expectation that it will be comparable to the quality of an inline wired mic?


I have not done such a comparison. What I could say is that in their marketing material, each of them claims to have a high quality mic, and they all use Qualcomm cVc noise cancellation during calls.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

new HiBy W3 saber is available on Aliexpress


----------



## Lohb

W3 Saber = 32mWatts per channel power...uuh.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> W3 Saber = 32mWatts per channel power...uuh.



Don't get all caught up by number. 32mW is more than enough most of the time.

I actually have the W3 Saber since early last month, it is a decent but minor improvement over the original W3. SQ remains largely the same (same DAC/amp chip after all) but now it has a better implemented gain and volume control.


----------



## Lohb

It matters if you want to use 'easier to drive' planar headphones with these new gen dongles. I think 250mWatts per channel covers IEMs and quite a few new gen planars in that case.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> It matters if you want to use 'easier to drive' planar headphones with these new gen dongles. I think 250mWatts per channel covers IEMs and quite a few new gen planars in that case.



I think if you really need 250mW of driving power to start with, then picking a small BT adapter is already kinda a wrong choice.


----------



## Lohb (Jan 3, 2021)

It's a second choice to DAPs/desktop stack. I stack BTR5 on an Anker battery and power that up with planars.

Always on look out for something similar power in dongle format but better..planars can get going 200mWatts and up....use BTR5 with DCA Ether CX / DCA Aeon 2 / Audeze iSine 20 all the time...only use about 50-75% volume on that stack because Fiio brought the headroom.


----------



## povidlo

ClieOS said:


> I think if you really need 250mW of driving power to start with, then picking a small BT adapter is already kinda a wrong choice.


Qudelix does 240 mW in balanced out.


----------



## ClieOS

povidlo said:


> Qudelix does 240 mW in balanced out.



I know. I happens to own one, first batch nonetheless.

The problem with pairing, say a headphone that needs 250mW to sound good with a source that can push out 250mW at max is that you are fundamentally stressing the source to its limit - and that generally means you are not going to get the best performance out of it. The general rule is that, if you know your headphone needs a certain output power to sound good, you want your source to have at least 2~3 times more power for it to sound great because that way the source will not be stressed and will likely behave in its 'comfort zone'.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Any adventurous soul would like to test $36 AptxHD LDAC transmitter ?


----------



## rkw

nabuhodonozor said:


> Any adventurous soul would like to test $36 AptxHD LDAC transmitter ?


It has aptX HD but no mention of LDAC.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

rkw said:


> It has aptX HD but no mention of LDAC.



Yeah but seller told me it does support Ldac- unless he's lying ofc . He says all  CSR8675  chips support aptx hd or ldac but I'm not so sure about that. Fiio's latest BTA30 has same chip though


----------



## quisxx

Just found this thread, didn’t know BT mini dacs had come this far. Considering the YLM B2. Does anyone know if its LDAC in as well as out? Ive tried several devices but none received LDAC, only transmit. 
Thanks.


----------



## quisxx

Oriolus 1795 as well, if anyone’s heard it?


----------



## ClieOS

quisxx said:


> Just found this thread, didn’t know BT mini dacs had come this far. Considering the YLM B2. Does anyone know if its LDAC in as well as out? Ive tried several devices but none received LDAC, only transmit.
> Thanks.



All of the BT adapters listed here are BT *receiver*, and most of them do receiver LDAC. I think you got it backward - what you are looking for is LDAC transmitter (*the kind that send out LDAC signal) and those are not in the scope of this thread. However, I'll suggest you take a look at FiiO BTA30 if LDAC transmitter is what you are really looking for.


----------



## ClieOS

Hidizs H2 added


----------



## quisxx

ClieOS said:


> All of the BT adapters listed here are BT *receiver*, and most of them do receiver LDAC. I think you got it backward - what you are looking for is LDAC transmitter (*the kind that send out LDAC signal) and those are not in the scope of this thread. However, I'll suggest you take a look at FiiO BTA30 if LDAC transmitter is what you are really looking for.


Thanks, but its a LDAC receiver i need. I use my phone as the transmitter. Every receiving device i tried so far doesn’t take ldac in, only sends it out.


----------



## ClieOS

quisxx said:


> Thanks, but its a LDAC receiver i need. I use my phone as the transmitter. Every receiving device i tried so far doesn’t take ldac in, only sends it out.



Then as mentioned previously, most (*not all) of the BT adapter listed in the first page are capable of receiving LDAC.

Actually, most BT adapter WILL NOT send out LDAC (or any audio signal wirelessly for that matter)... so what exactly are these devices are you talking about?


----------



## quisxx

ClieOS said:


> Then as mentioned previously, most (*not all) of the BT adapter listed in the first page are capable of receiving LDAC.
> 
> Actually, most BT adapter WILL NOT send out LDAC (or any audio signal wirelessly for that matter)... so what exactly are these devices are you talking about?


Dx150, Dx200, Dx220, n6ii,. No ldac in a lot if players don’t. It’s becoming more widely discussed as more people use ldac. I was dead set on getting the paw6k then i found out that one also doesn’t to ldac in.

The only players i know for certain (I don’t know all obviously lol) that do ldac in are the sony 1a, 1z, and the cayin n8.


----------



## quisxx

ClieOS said:


> Actually, most BT adapter WILL NOT send out LDAC (or any audio signal wirelessly for that matter)...



if it is 2 way it does send out ldac to your wireless headphones (if they have the support ie. Sony wireless headphones).


----------



## ClieOS (Jan 4, 2021)

quisxx said:


> The only players i know for certain (I don’t know all obviously lol) that do ldac in are the sony 1a, 1z, and the cayin n8.



FiiO does support LDAC on most of their DAP.




quisxx said:


> if it is 2 way it does send out ldac to your wireless headphones (if they have the support ie. Sony wireless headphones).



There seems to be a big misunderstanding here. This is a BT adapter (receiver) thread - devices that receive BT audio signal from source, then converts the digital signal into analog audio, then send the analog audio to the (*wired) connected  headphone. A BT receiver DO NOT send out wireless BT audio to another wireless headphone. In fact, no such adapter ever exists.

Also, if your smartphone is the original wireless source, then you can just send the LDAC audio from your smartphone to wireless headphones. Sending the BT signal to an adapter first, then trying to resend it to a wireless headphones technically DOES NOT work (*in fact, a double wireless transmission will degrade the SQ if you could do it that way, but luckily smart engineers already figure out that no one should ever do so).

You are looking for a product that should not exist, hence why you didn't find one.


----------



## quisxx

It’s cool, i don’t use wireless headphones, haven’t found a pair i like yet.


----------



## waynes world

Hi @ClieOS! In no small part thanks to you, I finally broke down and ordered the Smabat ST10S black golds 150's. 

Do you have any thoughts on how the BTR3K will drive them? It's OK if you tell me I need to buy the Qudelix 5K lol.


----------



## ClieOS

waynes world said:


> Hi @ClieOS! In no small part thanks to you, I finally broke down and ordered the Smabat ST10S black golds 150's.
> 
> Do you have any thoughts on how the BTR3K will drive them? It's OK if you tell me I need to buy the Qudelix 5K lol.



BTR3K should be fine, though 5K is going to be better sounding.


----------



## Lurk650

nabuhodonozor said:


> Yeah but seller told me it does support Ldac- unless he's lying ofc . He says all  CSR8675  chips support aptx hd or ldac but I'm not so sure about that. Fiio's latest BTA30 has same chip though


May "support" it but I believe you have to pay a license fee to use LDAC in your device, so whether or not the seller is doing is that is a different story...I highly doubt they are


----------



## waynes world

ClieOS said:


> BTR3K should be fine, though 5K is going to be better sounding.



Thanks. You answered both questions the way I wanted you to


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Does Fiio has in plans releasing BTR5K  ?


----------



## ClieOS

Lurk650 said:


> May "support" it but I believe you have to pay a license fee to use LDAC in your device, so whether or not the seller is doing is that is a different story...I highly doubt they are



Correct, though I'll elaborate that, per Sony's LDAC licensing practice, the encoder's side (*the side that sends out LDAC, smartphone and DAP, etc) is practically free though you still need to apply a license to use it. The decoder side (BT adapter, DAC/amp, etc) is however not free and you will need to apply as well as to pay for the license. So don't assume every chipset that can support LDAC, such as CSR8675 in this case, will come automatically with LDAC - _they don't_. LDAC decoding capability is not part of Qualcomm SDK and therefore must be installed / burned to the chips by the BT adapters manufacturer using the LDAC SDK that provided by Sony when they applied and paid for the LDAC license. Thus for those who didn't pay, they will have no access to the LDAC SDK even if they used the same chip. Also, most of the small and (in all intended purpose) brand-less BT adapters manufacturer actually don't have access to the actual equipment nor the necessary software skill needed to make any change to the chip's firmware anyway. These manufacturer generally just buy off-the-shelf CSR8675 (*which will have the stock Qualcomm firmware installed,  no LDAC) and use those on the product. They will make ambiguous claim of "supporting LDAC" - just that the hardware is capable, there is no software in the chip to do so.



nabuhodonozor said:


> Does Fiio has in plans releasing BTR5K  ?



I don't have any concrete info, but FiiO has a fairly regular product update scheme that they follow, and it is generally around 2 years or so  (*assuming that particular line is selling well enough to warrant an update of course). BTR5 was released on late 2019, so a possible replacement model might be released around late 2021. If that's the case, we could start seeing new info around late Q3 ~ early Q4 2021 as FiiO usually avoids releasing new product info too early.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> Correct, though I'll elaborate that, per Sony's LDAC licensing practice, the encoder's side (*the side that sends out LDAC, smartphone and DAP, etc) is practically free though you still need to apply a license to use it. The decoder side (BT adapter, DAC/amp, etc) is however not free and you will need to apply as well as to pay for the license. So don't assume every chipset that can support LDAC, such as CSR8675 in this case, will come automatically with LDAC - _they don't_. LDAC decoding capability is not part of Qualcomm SDK and therefore must be installed / burned to the chips by the BT adapters manufacturer using the LDAC SDK that provided by Sony when they applied and paid for the LDAC license. Thus for those who didn't pay, they will have no access to the LDAC SDK even if they used the same chip. Also, most of the small and (in all intended purpose) brand-less BT adapters manufacturer actually don't have access to the actual equipment nor the necessary software skill needed to make any change to the chip's firmware anyway. These manufacturer generally just buy off-the-shelf CSR8675 (*which will have the stock Qualcomm firmware installed,  no LDAC) and use those on the product. They will make ambiguous claim of "supporting LDAC" - just that the hardware is capable, there is no software in the chip to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have any concrete info, but FiiO has a fairly regular product update scheme that they follow, and it is generally around 2 years or so  (*assuming that particular line is selling well enough to warrant an update of course). BTR5 was released on late 2019, so a possible replacement model might be released around late 2021. If that's the case, we could start seeing new info around late Q3 ~ early Q4 2021 as FiiO usually avoids releasing new product info too early.



Maybe that's why they don't mention LDAC support in title and description because all Aptx codecs are free ?


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Lurk650 said:


> May "support" it but I believe you have to pay a license fee to use LDAC in your device, so whether or not the seller is doing is that is a different story...I highly doubt they are



Yeah he's prob lying. Wonder if that 24bit part is true though. Is there any cheaper AptxHD transmitter with 24bit rate?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Maybe that's why they don't mention LDAC support in title and description because all Aptx codecs are free ?



Technically aptX isn't free, just that Qualcomm already includes it on almost all of their BT chipset as part of the firmware. Kind of an one-package deal from Qualcomm to entice more manufacturers to use their chips.


----------



## Lohb (Jan 10, 2021)

I wonder if Fiio has anything in the works above BTR5.....BTR7...BTR9 etc...just always amazed at the performance it gives for such a small package...all they need to do is build on that now..I'd take it slightly longer for better battery life..no problem.


----------



## ClieOS

Lohb said:


> I wonder if Fiio has anything in the works above BTR5.....BTR7...BTR9 etc...just always amazed at the performance it gives for such a small package...all they need to do is build on that now..I'd take it slightly longer for better battery life..no problem.



There is nothing, technical and size wise, that is going to be a lot better than what there is inside BTR5, so making a BTR7 or BTR9 will not likely going to make a lot of sense unless FiiO is planning something bigger in size. Then again, making something bigger will loss the major benefit of continence and therefore restricting the market (*it will be have to be marketed toward DAC/amp users rather than BT adapter users). Then again, for those who indeed looking for ultimate performance, FiiO already has the Q5s. If anything, intermediate sized BT device such as the Oriolus 1795 has proven that it has compromised too much in size to be popular. I think the next major effort for FiiO should be moving the "BTR5K" to the QCC51xx platform, as CSR8675 has seen its better days and currently is being phased out by Qualcomm. The extra processing power of the QCC51xx series will open up a lot of possibility that simplify can't be done on CSR8675.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

That transmitter I found on Aliexpress is like a rip-off/copy of THIS one that is on Amazon and Ali as well
Different inputs though. Is 24bit even possible via USB?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> That transmitter I found on Aliexpress is like a rip-off/copy of THIS one that is on Amazon and Ali as well
> Different inputs though. Is 24bit even possible via USB?



Good point. It is a bit complicate on whether any BT transmitter with CSR8675 is capable of receiver 24bit over USB.

There is no double CSR8675 can send and decode 24/96 over Bluetooth (*the former is mainly a function of the processor + firmware, the later is mainly a function of its internal 24/192 DAC), but the chip itself only has a USB receiver function that is capable of 16/48 max.  So if the manufacturer doesn't include an extra 24 bit USB receiver chip but instead relies on the internal USB receiver function of CSR8675, then the USB input will be limited to 16/48 max. I didn't see any extra USB receiver chip on the ALi page, suggesting it is very likely using CSR8675's USB receiver function and therefore USB input will be capped to 16/48. However, given it has SPDIF input as well, you can probably still send 24/96 (or even 24/192) SPDIF signal via the COAX or OPT input.


----------



## nabuhodonozor (Jan 11, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> Good point. It is a bit complicate on whether any BT transmitter with CSR8675 is capable of receiver 24bit over USB.
> 
> There is no double CSR8675 can send and decode 24/96 over Bluetooth (*the former is mainly a function of the processor + firmware, the later is mainly a function of its internal 24/192 DAC), but the chip itself only has a USB receiver function that is capable of 16/48 max.  So if the manufacturer doesn't include an extra 24 bit USB receiver chip but instead relies on the internal USB receiver function of CSR8675, then the USB input will be limited to 16/48 max. I didn't see any extra USB receiver chip on the ALi page, suggesting it is very likely using CSR8675's USB receiver function and therefore USB input will be capped to 16/48. However, given it has SPDIF input as well, you can probably still send 24/96 (or even 24/192) SPDIF signal via the COAX or OPT input.



On the other hand do we even need 24bit? Apparently there is no real difference/advantage over 16bit

EDIT: I found THIS thread about USB transmitter  Avantree DG60 . Apparently it was also working at 16bit but people got replacement units that worked at 24bit? So is it software issue ?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> On the other hand do we even need 24bit? Apparently there is no real difference/advantage over 16bit
> 
> EDIT: I found THIS thread about USB transmitter  Avantree DG60 . Apparently it was also working at 16bit but people got replacement units that worked at 24bit? So is it software issue ?



Without knowing what hardware it used, it is hard to say for sure. But it does seem to be more of a software issue.


----------



## CasioPSX

if i wanted to mostly use the Bluetooth function primarily and usb function secondly, would you reccomend the BTR5 or the Q5k? i was leaning towards the q5k, but the btr5 clip looks like it would clip onto my gym fannypack easily because of its longer size, and the q5k's clip doesn't look too trustworthy, also worried about accidentally hitting the buttons. I've also heard of connectivity issues with the btr5, like it cutting off if it's in one pocket and the phone is in another, is this true? anyways, which would you suggest for walking/going to gym best? thanks


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> Don't get all caught up by number. 32mW is more than enough most of the time.
> 
> I actually have the W3 Saber since early last month, it is a decent but minor improvement over the original W3. SQ remains largely the same (same DAC/amp chip after all) but now it has a better implemented gain and volume control.


Can you be more specific about the better volume control, did they add more steps, is it more even now or both? 
And about better implemented gain... i allways assumed thats a feature left in the app from some other device , i could probably hear a tiiiiny difference but was thinking it might be psychological thing. Whats improved about it, can you actually hear a clear difference now?


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> Can you be more specific about the better volume control, did they add more steps, is it more even now or both?
> And about better implemented gain... i allways assumed thats a feature left in the app from some other device , i could probably hear a tiiiiny difference but was thinking it might be psychological thing. Whats improved about it, can you actually hear a clear difference now?



The original W3 and the new W3s both has their gain setting controlled by the app. On the original W3, the volume range on low gain is too wide and the steps too few, so it often becomes an issue that at one volume the headphone sounds too soft, but on the next level it becomes too loud. To mediate the issue, I'll have to lower / cap the max volume via app and thus making each steps smaller. On the W3s however, I didn't face any volume adjustment issue as the gain and volume step are much better spaced-out.


----------



## ClieOS

CasioPSX said:


> if i wanted to mostly use the Bluetooth function primarily and usb function secondly, would you reccomend the BTR5 or the Q5k? i was leaning towards the q5k, but the btr5 clip looks like it would clip onto my gym fannypack easily because of its longer size, and the q5k's clip doesn't look too trustworthy, also worried about accidentally hitting the buttons. I've also heard of connectivity issues with the btr5, like it cutting off if it's in one pocket and the phone is in another, is this true? anyways, which would you suggest for walking/going to gym best? thanks



If the issue is which BT adapter has a stronger connection, then I'll say 5K. However, connection issue might not be the only problem here as the BT source also affects the transmission as well. I use a Sony Xperia 5 myself (and mostly Sony flagship smartphone in the past) and generally speaking had have no connection issue with BTR5 going from one pocket to another, can't really speak for other smartphones.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

I'd love to have little transmitter like that with nice screen but also with AptxHD
This one has "only" Aptx LL


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> The original W3 and the new W3s both has their gain setting controlled by the app. On the original W3, the volume range on low gain is too wide and the steps too few, so it often becomes an issue that at one volume the headphone sounds too soft, but on the next level it becomes too loud. To mediate the issue, I'll have to lower / cap the max volume via app and thus making each steps smaller. On the W3s however, I didn't face any volume adjustment issue as the gain and volume step are much better spaced-out.


Thanks for the clarification. Did they by any chance improve the mic? As on the original W3 i have its pretty bad. Catches the slightest strokes/touches on the body of the receiver, people cant hear me well even if i bring it close to the mouth. Did test it on a pc in a quiet room and sometimes it can sound good, but most of the time it doesnt. Noise cancellation seems too sensitive and probably activates due to just touching the receiver.Basically i gave up on it, and most of the time im using the phone earpiece.

Since you have experience with the whole bunch of these devices, compared to W3 how would you rate the mics from  Shanling UP2 and BTR3K? Are they any good, just useable or a disaster as on the W3?


----------



## ClieOS

Didn't really spend much time testing any of the mics as I don't really use them much.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> Didn't really spend much time testing any of the mics as I don't really use them much.



Is it true W3 supports 24bit in USB Dac mode ?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Is it true W3 supports 24bit in USB Dac mode ?



W3 definitely doesn't support 24bit in USB DAC mode. W3*s* probably can support 24bit in USB DAC if Hiby can enable it over firmware - but last I checked, it is 16 bit only.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> W3 definitely doesn't support 24bit in USB DAC mode. W3*s* probably can support 24bit in USB DAC if Hiby can enable it over firmware - but last I checked, it is 16 bit only.



Huh I asked Hiby support and they told me it does support it.
 Liars


----------



## Eric F

What's the differences between the Hiby W3 and the W3S (Saber)? I assume the Saber is the newer model- is it better than the W3? They are pretty much the same price.


----------



## ClieOS

Eric F said:


> What's the differences between the Hiby W3 and the W3S (Saber)? I assume the Saber is the newer model- is it better than the W3? They are pretty much the same price.



Here:



ClieOS said:


> Yes and no.
> 
> Yes in the sense that W3 is in the process of upgrading to W3S (apparently 'S' stands for Sabre). No in the sense that the major difference between W3 and W3S is that the W3S will be using a new SoC (QCC5121) instead of the older CSR8675 found in W3 - however, we will still see the same DAC/amp chip (AKM4377) on W3S so it is unlikely we will see any major difference in SQ. QCC5121 is a more powerful SoC so we might see improvement in BT connection stability, or even new features like ANC and EQ (though it is worth knowing that Hiby didn't dedicate much effort to its BT adapters / app in the past so they might not bother bring new features at all, even though the new SoC might be capable of them). At this point the safer assumption is that this upgrade might be more of a response to Qualcomm phasing out CSR8675 as we also see FiiO has suddenly retired CSR8675 from its Q5s and replacing it with QCC5124 in its Q5s Type-C





ClieOS said:


> Don't get all caught up by number. 32mW is more than enough most of the time.
> 
> I actually have the W3 Saber since early last month, it is a decent but minor improvement over the original W3. SQ remains largely the same (same DAC/amp chip after all) but now it has a better implemented gain and volume control.





ClieOS said:


> The original W3 and the new W3s both has their gain setting controlled by the app. On the original W3, the volume range on low gain is too wide and the steps too few, so it often becomes an issue that at one volume the headphone sounds too soft, but on the next level it becomes too loud. To mediate the issue, I'll have to lower / cap the max volume via app and thus making each steps smaller. On the W3s however, I didn't face any volume adjustment issue as the gain and volume step are much better spaced-out.


----------



## DeJaVu (Jan 20, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> Didn't really spend much time testing any of the mics as I don't really use them much.


Have you considered or could you do mic tests? Doing like couple of samples, one in quiet environment like a room and one on the street to test noise cancelling. While we all get the devices for the sound quality, it still is pretty convenient to be able to use it for calls while connected to phone and listening to music on the move. Mic samples are pretty scarce, only one i could find on youtube was for the BTR3, which sounded decent.



Eric F said:


> What's the differences between the Hiby W3 and the W3S (Saber)? I assume the Saber is the newer model- is it better than the W3? They are pretty much the same price.


W3s has ppgraded bluetooth chip, which has the potential to enable eq over all sample rates(currently works at max 48kHz both on W3 and W3s, including LDAC and USB Dac), and potential to enable higher sample rate for USB Dac mode. Has to be done via firmware update by the manufacturer, for now it doesnt exist.

Edit: Probably even 10 band EQ


----------



## Eric F

DeJaVu said:


> W3s has ppgraded bluetooth chip, which has the potential to enable eq over all sample rates(currently works at max 48kHz both on W3 and W3s, including LDAC and USB Dac), and potential to enable higher sample rate for USB Dac mode. Has to be done via firmware update by the manufacturer, for now it doesnt exist.
> 
> Edit: Probably even 10 band EQ


Is it worth getting over a BTR3K? Used they are the same price.


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> Have you considered or could you do mic tests?



Don't have the time to do any proper test at the moment.



DeJaVu said:


> W3s has ppgraded bluetooth chip, which has the potential to enable eq over all sample rates(currently works at max 48kHz both on W3 and W3s, including LDAC and USB Dac), and potential to enable higher sample rate for USB Dac mode. Has to be done via firmware update by the manufacturer, for now it doesnt exist.
> 
> Edit: Probably even 10 band EQ



There's good potential with all the QCC51xx chipsets. But unfortunately as far as I know, Qualcomm SDK is kinda rudimentary and therefore required device maker to develop their own firmware for any extra feature. Personally, I don't see Hiby spending any real time doing that as they have been pretty lazy updating their BT adapter firmware in the past.


----------



## Eric F (Jan 20, 2021)

I'm not sure what to buy in the $60 range. This would be my first portable bluetooth DAC. Any suggestions would be appreciated.


----------



## DeJaVu (Jan 20, 2021)

Eric F said:


> Is it worth getting over a BTR3K? Used they are the same price.





Eric F said:


> Is it worth getting over a BTR3K? Used they are the same price.


Depends what features you can live without. On BTR3K you can disable charging when connected as USB Dac which is good for battery longevity(hiby cant). You have 10 band EQ(hiby 5band), on hiby EQ works when in USB Dac mode and over LDAC up to 48kHz sample rate(on BTR3K it doesnt at all in those 2 modes). On BTR3K app you can disable certain codecs(hiby cant), good thing if what youre connected to doesnt have the capability for user to choose. You get balanced output on the BTR3K if thats important to you. Hiby W3 has a disaster of a mic(cant say about the S), and if i go by the mic sample i found from BTR3 i would assume that it shouldnt be worse on the BTR3K and is decent.

I got my Hiby W3 for $42 , and at that price id say its a bargain, but if comparing MSRP $59(hiby) vs $69(Fiio) i would have to think hard and would probably go for Fiio. Theres a seller coupon on aliexpress for the new Hiby atm, which brings it to $51 for me atm. So its up to you 

Edit: BTW BTR3K can be had for about $58 with aliexpress coupons when there is a sale. Chinese new year is close.


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> Don't have the time to do any proper test at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> There's good potential with all the QCC51xx chipsets. But unfortunately as far as I know, Qualcomm SDK is kinda rudimentary and therefore required device maker to develop their own firmware for any extra feature. Personally, I don't see Hiby spending any real time doing that as they have been pretty lazy updating their BT adapter firmware in the past.



Too bad, hopefully youll have some time in the future.

Sounds right, about the same impression here about hiby and their firmware upgrades.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

DeJaVu said:


> Depends what features you can live without. On BTR3K you can disable charging when connected as USB Dac which is good for battery longevity(hiby cant). You have 10 band EQ(hiby 5band), on hiby EQ works when in USB Dac mode and over LDAC up to 48kHz sample rate(on BTR3K it doesnt at all in those 2 modes). On BTR3K app you can disable certain codecs(hiby cant), good thing if what youre connected to doesnt have the capability for user to choose. You get balanced output on the BTR3K if thats important to you. Hiby W3 has a disaster of a mic(cant say about the S), and if i go by the mic sample i found from BTR3 i would assume that it shouldnt be worse on the BTR3K and is decent.
> 
> I got my Hiby W3 for $42 , and at that price id say its a bargain, but if comparing MSRP $59(hiby) vs $69(Fiio) i would have to think hard and would probably go for Fiio. Theres a seller coupon on aliexpress for the new Hiby atm, which brings it to $51 for me atm. So its up to you
> 
> Edit: BTW BTR3K can be had for about $58 with aliexpress coupons when there is a sale. Chinese new year is close.



I just bought W3 Saber from Ali for $39 .Mostly because I didn't want to wait for next BTR3K sale .Hope I won't regret it...
Plus for saved $ I can buy some AptxHD transceiver from Ali for my PC. Didn't know you can't turn off charging W3 while in DAC mode. Kinda bummer tbh -seems like obvious thing to include


----------



## monsieurfromag3

nabuhodonozor said:


> Didn't know you can't turn off charging W3 while in DAC mode. Kinda bummer tbh -seems like obvious thing to include


Not possible either with the $500 Cayin N3Pro DAP. It’s irritating but from what I gather it’s not that simple and has to be planned around when laying out the power circuitry.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

monsieurfromag3 said:


> Not possible either with the $500 Cayin N3Pro DAP. It’s irritating but from what I gather it’s not that simple and has to be planned around when laying out the power circuitry.



Wow. Did you stop using it as USB DAC ? Any battery deterioration?


----------



## monsieurfromag3

nabuhodonozor said:


> Wow. Did you stop using it as USB DAC ? Any battery deterioration?


It’s OK for me because I often use it when I’m out as a BT receiver, in which case it’s running off its own battery. That depletes the battery enough for me to then tolerate the mandatory charge in USB mode.
It was also draining my phone battery like mad so I set things up like so:




Not quite the tiny, elegant footprint of a BT receiver used as USB dongle!


----------



## DeJaVu (Jan 21, 2021)

nabuhodonozor said:


> I just bought W3 Saber from Ali for $39 .Mostly because I didn't want to wait for next BTR3K sale .Hope I won't regret it...
> Plus for saved $ I can buy some AptxHD transceiver from Ali for my PC. Didn't know you can't turn off charging W3 while in DAC mode. Kinda bummer tbh -seems like obvious thing to include


If you use it mainly as bluetooth receiver and rare times usb dac it shouldnt matter much, but if other way around then its good thing to have the ability to disable charging. My impression is that they didnt care much about battery longevity in general, charging current for the hiby is 300ma (judging by btr3k charging time from the spec sheet, its same there too), which is bit more than ideal.Should have gone for 0.5c(150 ma current), but then charging time would be 2.5 hours and might look bad for them on the spec sheets, probably why both choose 1c charging rate. Qudelix is the only small portable receiver that im aware of that does battery care right.

Congrats on your purchase, now pray that they actually update the firmware making use of the potential the updated bt chip has . Curious to know about your impression about the mic on it when you receive it. BTW, how did you manage to get it for $39?

Let me save you few $ for a transmiter for PC. Install Voicemeeter on PC(you need vban component from it) and VBAN Receptor on Android. That combo can stream uncompressed PCM up to 96/24 to your phone via network. Just connect hiby to your phone and you get audio from your pc to hiby, you even get LDAC if your phone supports it(most Android 8+ do). Phone can be connected to either 5GHz wifi or usb tethered to pc, 2.4Ghz wont work. If you have an old phone that youre not using, you can dedicate it to that role. I have dedicated 8 years old Nexus 4 with android 9(custom rom from xda) for that role, even had the ability to install dolby atmos on it for movies . Combined it with ACC app(advanced charging controller), so i can control how and when it is charged while being usb tethered all the time, so i dont quickly kill the already not that good battery.
Edit: Newer phones can have the ability to bypass battery when set level of charge with ACC reached, and use power from usb. Depends if kernel supports that feature, tried with nexus 5 and that one supports it with Lineage 17.1 rom.

Theres another option with using Linux Virtual machine in Virtualbox , and a cheap bt adapter(im using Orico BTA-403 with csr 8510 chip). You can add AAC, aptx, aptx HD, LDAC support to linux bt stack, and then route the audio through the same chain as on mobile.Vban on linux and Voicemeeter on pc. Can be automated with a bat file and it takes around 20 seconds before you can connect the receiver, uses less than 100mb ram. With this solution you also get sink ability(send audio from phone or other transmitter to pc), but you cant get atmos(not sure if the $15 atmos win10 store sells can be made to work in this chain).


----------



## nabuhodonozor

DeJaVu said:


> If you use it mainly as bluetooth receiver and rare times usb dac it shouldnt matter much, but if other way around then its good thing to have the ability to disable charging. My impression is that they didnt care much about battery longevity in general, charging current for the hiby is 300ma (judging by btr3k charging time from the spec sheet, its same there too), which is bit more than ideal.Should have gone for 0.5c(150 ma current), but then charging time would be 2.5 hours and might look bad for them on the spec sheets, probably why both choose 1c charging rate. Qudelix is the only small portable receiver that im aware of that does battery care right.
> 
> Congrats on your purchase, now pray that they actually update the firmware making use of the potential the updated bt chip has . Curious to know about your impression about the mic on it when you receive it. BTW, how did you manage to get it for $39?
> 
> ...



Yeah I wanted light headphone amp that I could use wirelessly when watching movie or something .So mainly it would be PC dac- so fml. Guess I'll be selling that thing....
What features can that new chip bring with firmware update?
That phone solution seems like too much pain in the A tbh and potential latency . Those transceivers are pretty cheap -like $20 so I'd rather opt for that.

Hiby just had another sale and I combined their discount with my coupon and additional discount from Ali coins .


----------



## DeJaVu

nabuhodonozor said:


> Yeah I wanted light headphone amp that I could use wirelessly when watching movie or something .So mainly it would be PC dac- so fml. Guess I'll be selling that thing....
> What features can that new chip bring with firmware update?
> That phone solution seems like too much pain in the A tbh and potential latency . Those transceivers are pretty cheap -like $20 so I'd rather opt for that.
> 
> Hiby just had another sale and I combined their discount with my coupon and additional discount from Ali coins .


Theres info in 2 previous messages, one from me and one from clieos what the new chip can potentially bring. 

Not a pain in the ass at all with the phone, just setup Voicemeeter and vban receptor(you dont need to do all the things i did if you dont want to or deem unnecesary), once you spent the time to make it working its pretty easy afterwards. VBAN doesnt add too much latency, around 30ms(judged by eye using some latency tests), which is just a fraction of what you would naturally get with the BT codec.Many video players have audio shifting, so you can compensate for that if it bothers you. And you wont have to have your hiby plugged in all the time so you wont have to worry about the battery .
The thing with the $20 transceivers is that they dont support LDAC(only one that i know of and it does is Fiio BTA30 which is $90) and plenty require for you to have optical or coax output on your soundcard.


----------



## nabuhodonozor (Jan 22, 2021)

@ClieOS
Hey- you have updated Saber version of Hiby W3 ,right? Is it still not turning off charging after being fully charged?

@DeJaVu Yeah lack of LDAC is a problem. I'll try your method


----------



## nabuhodonozor (Jan 22, 2021)

wth I clicked EDIT and it quoted my reply ?
can someone delete this? 

Why I can't delete my own post btw?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> @ClieOS
> Hey- you have updated Saber version of Hiby W3 ,right? Is it still not turning off charging after being fully charged?



As far as I notice, there doesn't seem to be any difference between W3 and W3s charging behavior.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> As far as I notice, there doesn't seem to be any difference between W3 and W3s charging behavior.


 
Well that sucks then. Is there any BT AMP that supports 24bit in DAC mode btw?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Well that sucks then. Is there any BT AMP that supports 24bit in DAC mode btw?



BTR5 and 5K


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> BTR5 and 5K



For a sec thought Fiio released BTR5K


----------



## DeJaVu

nabuhodonozor said:


> @ClieOS
> Hey- you have updated Saber version of Hiby W3 ,right? Is it still not turning off charging after being fully charged?


Youre misunderstanding the issue a bit. Its not that it doesnt stop charging the battery when full. It does. I have it measured with a usb tester and a wall adapter, and even after full there still is some current drawn by the device. If that current is a trickle charge that would be bad, but it might be only the current needed for the charging IC standby(looks like it from what ive figured so far), but i have no way of telling 100% as i didnt see any documentation how the charging on hiby is implemented.

Hiby connected to usb is drawing 110ma current, which is better for the battery than charging with the 300ma from the wall adapter. But CV Charging stage is longer than usual compared to wall adapter which is not that good, so you win some you loose some, cant say which one is worse/better in the long run. Longer CV stage makes me think that it actually does draw some power from the battery even when idle in USB mode, but still need to do few more tests when i have the time(or never  ) to come to a definite conclusion about this.
After fully charged, it will automatically resume charging when battery gets down to around 85% .The problem for lithium batteries is being kept for prolonged periods of time at Full or near Full state, which being connected to usb most of the time will do. In case of Hiby W3 it will keep it between 85-100% , + the longer than usual CV stage. Not as bad as keeping it at 100% all the time though, as you presumed it does.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

DeJaVu said:


> Youre misunderstanding the issue a bit. Its not that it doesnt stop charging the battery when full. It does. I have it measured with a usb tester and a wall adapter, and even after full there still is some current drawn by the device. If that current is a trickle charge that would be bad, but it might be only the current needed for the charging IC standby(looks like it from what ive figured so far), but i have no way of telling 100% as i didnt see any documentation how the charging on hiby is implemented.
> 
> Hiby connected to usb is drawing 110ma current, which is better for the battery than charging with the 300ma from the wall adapter. But CV Charging stage is longer than usual compared to wall adapter which is not that good, so you win some you loose some, cant say which one is worse/better in the long run. Longer CV stage makes me think that it actually does draw some power from the battery even when idle in USB mode, but still need to do few more tests when i have the time(or never  ) to come to a definite conclusion about this.
> After fully charged, it will automatically resume charging when battery gets down to around 85% .The problem for lithium batteries is being kept for prolonged periods of time at Full or near Full state, which being connected to usb most of the time will do. In case of Hiby W3 it will keep it between 85-100% , + the longer than usual CV stage. Not as bad as keeping it at 100% all the time though, as you presumed it does.




So would it be better for the battery just to use it wirelessly and when on like 10% power plug it in to slowly charge back vias USB? That would make it charge and discharge like 2 times per day..


----------



## laevi

Can anyone comment on the sound quality of the Hiby W3 relative to the Fiio BTR3K? I tried out a Fiio BTR3K and the Qudelix with my UERM IEMs and found that the BTR3K sounded too warm, congested, and muffled for my liking (using 3.5mm single ended connection). I didn't like that sound signature. The Qudelix sounded more to my liking, but it was too expensive for me. I am wondering if the Hiby W3S might suit me better?

Thanks.


----------



## ClieOS

laevi said:


> Can anyone comment on the sound quality of the Hiby W3 relative to the Fiio BTR3K? I tried out a Fiio BTR3K and the Qudelix with my UERM IEMs and found that the BTR3K sounded too warm, congested, and muffled for my liking (using 3.5mm single ended connection). I didn't like that sound signature. The Qudelix sounded more to my liking, but it was too expensive for me. I am wondering if the Hiby W3S might suit me better?
> 
> Thanks.



Both BTR3K and W3 use AKM chips with very similar SQ (AK4377A vs. AK4377), so don't expect any major difference in overall sound.

However, if you haven't done so - try change the digital filter in BTR3K via app. It will affect the SQ in subtle way.


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> So would it be better for the battery just to use it wirelessly and when on like 10% power plug it in to slowly charge back vias USB? That would make it charge and discharge like 2 times per day..



Deep cycling is a very quick way to shorten battery life.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> Deep cycling is a very quick way to shorten battery life.



so like 30%?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> so like 30%?



Rule of thumb for maximizing Li-ion battery life is to charge it as often as you can, minimizing battery drop as much as possible and only occasionally deep cycle it. Also, slower charging cycle is better. Of course, it isn't always convenience to do it this way. That being said, it is better to use something that doesn't have a battery if it is going to be powered by USB most of the time.


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> Deep cycling is a very quick way to shorten battery life.


Not sure if 10% can be called deep cycling, as most lithium cells i had and have spec sheets available have damage threshold at 2.5v , and theyre already empty at around 3.0v(some at 2.8v, and even had ones that are empty at 3.3v). But not knowing the exact specs for the battery in the device and at what point the electronics disconnect the battery, you have a point and might be a good thing to not go low. 
Given that long term storage charge is around 30-40% and charging to 80% would give you around 3x charge cycles, i mostly recommend charging your device 30-80%. If thats not too inconvenient and actually makes your device a pita to use and you loose the enjoyment, a thin line . @nabuhodonozor


----------



## nabuhodonozor

DeJaVu said:


> Not sure if 10% can be called deep cycling, as most lithium cells i had and have spec sheets available have damage threshold at 2.5v , and theyre already empty at around 3.0v(some at 2.8v, and even had ones that are empty at 3.3v). But not knowing the exact specs for the battery in the device and at what point the electronics disconnect the battery, you have a point and might be a good thing to not go low.
> Given that long term storage charge is around 30-40% and charging to 80% would give you around 3x charge cycles, i mostly recommend charging your device 30-80%. If thats not too inconvenient and actually makes your device a pita to use and you loose the enjoyment, a thin line . @nabuhodonozor



If I was to use my phone as BT transmitter it would be rather annoying to have it connected to my PC all day . Guess I'll shift to BTR3K. Shame because Hiby has that new chip. Is disabling charging something that could be added with firmware update ( yeah I know wishful thinking) or is it mostly hardware ?


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> That being said, it is better to use something that doesn't have a battery if it is going to be powered by USB most of the time.


Or a Qudelix 5K



nabuhodonozor said:


> If I was to use my phone as BT transmitter it would be rather annoying to have it connected to my PC all day . Guess I'll shift to BTR3K. Shame because Hiby has that new chip. Is disabling charging something that could be added with firmware update ( yeah I know wishful thinking) or is it mostly hardware ?


You dont have to have it connected all day, just when you need it, or you can use 5GHz wifi for network so you dont have to connect it ever.
It could be added via firmware if the hardware supports such feature. But dont bet your house on it


----------



## nabuhodonozor

DeJaVu said:


> Or a Qudelix 5K
> 
> 
> You dont have to have it connected all day, just when you need it, or you can use 5GHz wifi for network so you dont have to connect it ever.
> It could be added via firmware if the hardware supports such feature. But dont bet your house on it



Well I have my headphones on almost whole day sitting at my PC desk so I'd need phone to stream it a lot and phone's battery would get drained as well 
BTW do smartphones cut out charging or would I have to juggle both W3 and my phone with charging


----------



## DeJaVu (Jan 23, 2021)

nabuhodonozor said:


> Well I have my headphones on almost whole day sitting at my PC desk so I'd need phone to stream it a lot and phone's battery would get drained as well
> BTW do smartphones cut out charging or would I have to juggle both W3 and my phone with charging


Wont get drained as much as if you were actually using it with screen on.
Receive the device and try, you have been presented with few solutions(phone, Lunux VM, Fiio BTA30, or a cheap transceiver with no LDAC), so see what fits your use case best and is most convenient to you.


@ClieOS On BTR3K/BTR5 when you disable charging via app, does it switch to drawing power from usb, or it just disables charging and still uses the battery for power?


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> @ClieOS On BTR3K/BTR5 when you disable charging via app, does it switch to drawing power from usb, or it just disables charging and still uses the battery for power?



It will use battery until it is almost drained, then it will turn on charging automatically before battery gets too low. This is a feature designed not for long term stationary USB powered usage, but for smartphone's USB DAC usage as some smartphone can't power USB DAC properly / drain it's own battery too fast when attempting to charge whatever is connected to its USB port.


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> It will use battery until it is almost drained, then it will turn on charging automatically before battery gets too low. This is a feature designed not for long term stationary USB powered usage, but for smartphone's USB DAC usage as some smartphone can't power USB DAC properly / drain it's own battery too fast when attempting to charge whatever is connected to its USB port.


Thanks for the detailed explanation.



laevi said:


> Can anyone comment on the sound quality of the Hiby W3 relative to the Fiio BTR3K? I tried out a Fiio BTR3K and the Qudelix with my UERM IEMs and found that the BTR3K sounded too warm, congested, and muffled for my liking (using 3.5mm single ended connection). I didn't like that sound signature. The Qudelix sounded more to my liking, but it was too expensive for me. I am wondering if the Hiby W3S might suit me better?
> 
> Thanks.



Have the w3 and while it is warm sounding, i dont find it muffled or congested.But probably depends on iems used and what you compare to.
Maybe Shanling UP2 is worth a look. Here its described as warmish(same as the btr3k and W3) but im expecting it to be not as warm and more detailed than W3 due to it using same ESS dac/amp as the qudelix and btr5. Should receive it in a week or two and see if my expectations were right. Will share my impressions if i dont forget, or you remind me.


----------



## laevi

DeJaVu said:


> Thanks for the detailed explanation.
> 
> Have the w3 and while it is warm sounding, i dont find it muffled or congested.But probably depends on iems used and what you compare to.
> Maybe Shanling UP2 is worth a look. Here its described as warmish(same as the btr3k and W3) but im expecting it to be not as warm and more detailed than W3 due to it using same ESS dac/amp as the qudelix and btr5. Should receive it in a week or two and see if my expectations were right. Will share my impressions if i dont forget, or you remind me.



Looking forward to your impressions


----------



## alex5908 (Jan 27, 2021)

Hello everybody,
Does anybody have Hiby R3 and one of the dongles supporting UAT?
Could you then compare the SQ and signal stability between LDAC and UAT?
I am trying it with Hiby R3 and Qudelix 5K (which does not support UAT) and for me the SQ of UAT is better than LDAC. I assign UAT 1.2M for R3. The control is much better and the bass digs much deeper. I checked what codec is received by Qudelix in its app. It shows LDAC but with only 303mbps. While assigning LDAC for both R3 and Qudelix shows 909mbps. So I am confused. How come 303mbps sounds better to me than 909mbps?
I am not sure if I should buy a dongle with UAT support to pair it with Hiby R3 to get all the benefits of UAT codec. May be it's worth mentioning that I prefer warm sounding.


----------



## DeJaVu

alex5908 said:


> May be it's worth mentioning that I prefer warm sounding.


That statement above might be the key. To my ears At 909/990 you get better highs extension(more treble) and cleaner better controlled bass. The increase in treble itself afects the warmth and bass extension introduces more sub bass, which can drown the mid bass a bit(and most noticeable change in warmth/coldness you get in midbass area around 200-300 hz).
In the end of the day use what sounds best to you, even if its lesser bitrate, you get increased battery life as a bonus .


----------



## ClieOS

alex5908 said:


> Hello everybody,
> Does anybody have Hiby R3 and one of the dongles supporting UAT?
> Could you then compare the SQ and signal stability between LDAC and UAT?
> I am trying it with Hiby R3 and Qudelix 5K (which does not support UAT) and for me the SQ of UAT is better than LDAC. I assign UAT 1.2M for R3. The control is much better and the bass digs much deeper. I checked what codec is received by Qudelix in its app. It shows LDAC but with only 303mbps. While assigning LDAC for both R3 and Qudelix shows 909mbps. So I am confused. How come 303mbps sounds better to me than 909mbps?
> I am not sure if I should buy a dongle with UAT support to pair it with Hiby R3 to get all the benefits of UAT codec. May be it's worth mentioning that I prefer warm sounding.



Codec need to be supported by both source (i.e. smartphone, DAP, etc) and receiver (BT adapter) to work. When you set R3 to UAT, it won't work since 5K doesn't support UAT. In this kind of situation, the source will automatically select the next best codec it supports (which will be LDAC in this case). Things about LDAC is that it is usually dynamic auto scaling - meaning it will automatically jump to the highest SQ setting if condition allows, without the need of user input. If you are seeing 303*k*bps (or 330kbps), it usually means it just happened at the moment it is on 303kbps. But once condition is allowed, it will jump to 606 or 909 and generally won't stay at 303 all the time. I suspect what you are seeing is just an "at the moment" transmission rate.

Also, we refer BT adapter as BT adapter. Dongle usually refers to something that you plug into the USB port.

Lastly, I never come across any actual usable UAT device in the real world. It is a super unstable codec.


----------



## DeJaVu (Jan 27, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> Lastly, I never come across any actual usable UAT device in the real world. It is a super unstable codec.


It works perfectly fine on a bt4.0 seven year old phone, tested at 3m distance and back turned to transmitter meaning signal going through body, though signal reflections also helped as it was in a closed space.
Hiby might have silently reduced the UAT bandwidth. As 1 or 2 versions back in hiby blue there was a quick flash showing bitrate for UAT, and for me it showed 900 or 990, something around that number, cant recall the exact number as i played with it few months ago but im leaning more towards 900. Have you tested UAT recently for stability?


----------



## alex5908

ClieOS said:


> It is a super unstable codec.


How about HWA? Is it better than LDAC SQ and stability wise?


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> It works perfectly fine on a bt4.0 seven year old phone, tested at 3m distance and back turned to transmitter meaning signal going through body, though signal reflections also helped as it was in a closed space.
> Hiby might have silently reduced the UAT bandwidth. As 1 or 2 versions back in hiby blue there was a quick flash showing bitrate for UAT, and for me it showed 900 or 990, something around that number, cant recall the exact number as i played with it few months ago but im leaning more towards 900. Have you tested UAT recently for stability?



I tested mine awhile ago on normal everyday places that has PC and cellphones nearby and the interference was terrible. LDAC has no problem at the same place. Haven't tested it recently though.

I do wonder, if Hiby somehow did reduce the bandwidth (which will also reduce bit rate and depth) to gain stability, then what benefit will it has over LDAC anymore? Hmmm...




alex5908 said:


> How about HWA? Is it better than LDAC SQ and stability wise?



HWA is slightly better than UAT, but it is still unstable. The problem with HWA is that it was never optimized well enough in most smartphones except for Huawei. It is also being abandoned by Huawei now so it is pretty dead as a codec.


----------



## DeJaVu (Jan 28, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> I tested mine awhile ago on normal everyday places that has PC and cellphones nearby and the interference was terrible. LDAC has no problem at the same place. Haven't tested it recently though.


Just tested in a room in a building, with my wifi and plenty neighbours wifi signals, usual home setting. Havent tried it outside or in a mall with lots of phones around and stronger/closer wifi signals.



ClieOS said:


> I do wonder, if Hiby somehow did reduce the bandwidth (which will also reduce bit rate and depth) to gain stability, then what benefit will it has over LDAC anymore? Hmmm...


Only benefit would be no resampling as it automatically switches the sampling rate to one that source material has.Saves you the trouble switching ldac sampling rate manually(if you even have the option) if you have mixed music. But then on android with Hiby Player volume cant be controlled from the receiver for me, so its a mixed bag. Never used it because of that, and all my music is 44kHz.

I wouldnt be surprised if they actually did it, for some reason in the latest version of hiby blue they even removed display of mode LDAC is working in(Best Effort, Audio Quality, etc, only shows sampling rate now). Now everyones LDAC wil be the best quality out of the box, and wont need to deal with that many people getting curious and switching to 909/990, reducing the potential complaints from customers because some phones can have problems with 909/990. Probably going by "ignorance is bliss" moto in life .
Going to try and find the older version of Hiby Blue that actually showed that quick flash of UAT bitrate, or maybe it was connected to older version of Hiby player for android, we'll see.


----------



## DeJaVu (Jan 28, 2021)

So here are my findings
Hiby Blue 1.0 - when you press the handset icon it takes you to a codec selection menu. Much more convenient than going through developer options. You can change codec, bitrate/sample rate for ldac on Android 9. On android 10 it doesnt work at all. Theres a UAT section but its greyed out on android 9 and nothing can be selected, the bitrate it shows there is 900kbps, same as the short flash you get in hiby blue main menu.On android 10 you can actually enter UAT config menu and there are 3 entries 600/900/1200kbps , 900 is selected and clicking 1200 gives a warning about performance but nothing happens and 900kbps still remains highlighted, 600kbps also cant be selected.
No option to disable indication light nor car mode.

Hiby Blue 1.1 - Same as 1.0, just no more UAT menu present in codecs.Same 900kbps flash. Indicator light option added.No sound when Switching to UAT if hiby blue is running in the background when you do the switch

Hiby Blue  1.3 - Same but car mode added, pressing handset icon takes you to devops on android 10, on android 9 the codec selection menu is still there, no UAT entry.No sound when Switching to UAT if hiby blue is running in the background when you do the switch

Hiby Blue  1.44 - Pressing handset icon takes you to devops both on android 10 and on android 9.

Done for now, also like i said they removed display of LDAC mode/bitrate in 2 versions ago.So seems theyre developing the Hiby Blue app backwards. On android 9 or lower id stick with 1.0-1.3, (1.0 if you use UAT so you avoid the no sound bug). On android 10 doesnt matter much, but stick with 1.54 if you want LDAC bitrate displayed.
Older versions can be downloaded from apkpure.com or a similar site.

Judging by the version 1.0 of the app that could access the UAT settings on android 10, greyed 900kbps on Android 9, and also the 900kbps flashes in later versions(up to 1.54), seems like 1200kbps UAT was a great idea that never come to fruition and UAT always defaulted to 900kbps. 10 points to Hiby 

Would be great If someone could try Hiby Blue 1.0  on android 8 or lower, maybe selecting UAT bitrate would work.

Edit:
Might be a good idea to try Hiby Blue with older version of Hiby Music, maybe that way UAT bitrate becomes selectable on Android 9, and Actually does something on android 10. But thats a venture for a different time, unless someone else is curious and does it before me.


----------



## Ales R

Any suggestions for a BT DAC with a balanced 4.4mm? (besides the Fiio Q5s and Oriolus 1795 due to size) Codecs LDAC, aptX, aptX HD, AAC. Thanks


----------



## ClieOS

Ales R said:


> Any suggestions for a BT DAC with a balanced 4.4mm? (besides the Fiio Q5s and Oriolus 1795 due to size) Codecs LDAC, aptX, aptX HD, AAC. Thanks



There's no small BT DAC/amp with 4.4mm socket. 4.4mm socket by its own is already not a small thing.


----------



## nabuhodonozor (Feb 5, 2021)

DeJaVu said:


> Theres info in 2 previous messages, one from me and one from clieos what the new chip can potentially bring.
> 
> Not a pain in the ass at all with the phone, just setup Voicemeeter and vban receptor(you dont need to do all the things i did if you dont want to or deem unnecesary), once you spent the time to make it working its pretty easy afterwards. VBAN doesnt add too much latency, around 30ms(judged by eye using some latency tests), which is just a fraction of what you would naturally get with the BT codec.Many video players have audio shifting, so you can compensate for that if it bothers you. And you wont have to have your hiby plugged in all the time so you wont have to worry about the battery .
> The thing with the $20 transceivers is that they dont support LDAC(only one that i know of and it does is Fiio BTA30 which is $90) and plenty require for you to have optical or coax output on your soundcard.



EDIT : Nvm i misunderstood. 
So why phones cant act as bt transmitters?


----------



## Ynot1

Anyone know if anyone is looking at a new file format to do bluetooth lossless? I think codec development is hitting the diminishing return curve wall pretty hard. My thinking is outside of realtime on demand live audio sources, there is plenty of time to call on AI (not Allen Iverson) to figure out a way to minimize the maximum peak data size to fit through the bluetooth pipeline and still go lossless. And in this use case we should tolerate latency up front like the buffering Netflix uses. Just thinking out loud, let's use code book application and Huffman theory. I speculate this can be done.


----------



## rkw

nabuhodonozor said:


> So why phones cant act as bt transmitters?


Most phones are bt transmitters. Otherwise you couldn't use bt headphones with them.


----------



## brianzurf

Anyone know what is the cheapest phone with aptx hd


----------



## brianzurf

How about a tablet with aptx hd that would be even better


----------



## povidlo

Not a phone/tablet but Fiio M7 dap (could be had for $99usd nowadays, e.g. link) has a strong BT chip that supports aptx-hd. 

M7 can also be used as BT transmitter while in USB DAC mode. So, you could have your desktop/laptop connected to your aptx-hd headphones/dongles/etc with good BT connection quality.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

rkw said:


> Most phones are bt transmitters. Otherwise you couldn't use bt headphones with them.



Yeah sorry I meant why they can't "pass on"(?) data via BT from other devices


----------



## brianzurf

povidlo said:


> Not a phone/tablet but Fiio M7 dap (could be had for $99usd nowadays, e.g. link) has a strong BT chip that supports aptx-hd.
> 
> M7 can also be used as BT transmitter while in USB DAC mode. So, you could have your desktop/laptop connected to your aptx-hd headphones/dongles/etc with good BT connection quality.


Does it stream online services?


----------



## brianzurf

povidlo said:


> Not a phone/tablet but Fiio M7 dap (could be had for $99usd nowadays, e.g. link) has a strong BT chip that supports aptx-hd.
> 
> M7 can also be used as BT transmitter while in USB DAC mode. So, you could have your desktop/laptop connected to your aptx-hd headphones/dongles/etc with good BT connection quality.


So you can stream from your computer in usb dac mode


----------



## povidlo

brianzurf said:


> Does it stream online services?


You can enable wifi on it but it doesn't have a dedicated wifi antenna so signal is very weak. 

You have to be very close to your internet access point (router, cellphone hotspot etc) for wifi to work. It works well in terms of downloading music from streaming services to listen to offline but you cannot walk around and stream stuff (unless e.g. using your cell as hotspot and having both dap and your cell on you).


----------



## DeJaVu

povidlo said:


> M7 can also be used as BT transmitter while in USB DAC mode. So, you could have your desktop/laptop connected to your aptx-hd headphones/dongles/etc with good BT connection quality.


Are you 100% sure of this? As for M6 it is explicitly stated that it supports Transmit in USB DAC mode, but statement is not present in advertising material for M7k.


----------



## povidlo

DeJaVu said:


> Are you 100% sure of this? As for M6 it is explicitly stated that it supports Transmit in USB DAC mode, but statement is not present in advertising material for M7k.


Yes, I own it bro.

Not sure about m7k but I think it's the same model + wifi antenna.


----------



## DeJaVu

povidlo said:


> Yes, I own it bro.
> 
> Not sure about m7k but I think it's the same model + wifi antenna.


Nice, good to know it as an viable solution. Does it transmit all codecs in USB DAC mode, including LDAC?


----------



## povidlo

DeJaVu said:


> Nice, good to know it as an viable solution. Does it transmit all codecs in USB DAC mode, including LDAC?


That's correct. More info in the dedicated thread.


----------



## ClieOS

My experience with using DAP as LDAC transmitter for PC is that they will generally work for short session, but often run into bug or crash after a prolonged period. It is not exactly a long term solution.


----------



## Lohb

Comparing BTR5 wired vs Hiby R6 2020 there was not a lot of difference between the 2 in technicalities...only headroom.


----------



## alex5908

Lohb said:


> Comparing BTR5 wired vs Hiby R6 2020 there was not a lot of difference between the 2 in technicalities...only headroom.


Have you tried HWA BT codec in BTR5? Is it still buggy to the extent that you almost can't use it? The SQ is superb, though.


----------



## Lohb

alex5908 said:


> Have you tried HWA BT codec in BTR5? Is it still buggy to the extent that you almost can't use it? The SQ is superb, though.


Wireless for me was LDAC-phone, aptX-mac air, SBC- fireTVstick...not had a reason to try that codec.


----------



## alex5908 (Feb 6, 2021)

Lohb said:


> Wireless for me was LDAC-phone, aptX-mac air, SBC- fireTVstick...not had a reason to try that codec.


The SQ is much better with HWA compared to LDAC. Just try it.


----------



## Lohb

alex5908 said:


> The SQ is much better with HWA compared to LDAC. Just try it.


Ok, I'll see if my Xiaomi phone can transmit it.


----------



## DeJaVu (Feb 6, 2021)

Lohb said:


> Ok, I'll see if my Xiaomi phone can transmit it.


Only some huawei models support it natively. You will need Hiby Music Player or Fiio Music(android apps), you can enable HWA in their settings.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Wow I just realised in my Hiby W3 Saber there's annoying "low battery" voice prompt when battery goes below ......... wait for it........ 40% .....
Like why would anybody programmed it like that ? And it prompts you every 20seconds.....
Guess every BT manufactured in china has that haha. Remember testing BT headphones from Ali that had same annoying crap.


----------



## DeJaVu

nabuhodonozor said:


> Wow I just realised in my Hiby W3 Saber there's annoying "low battery" voice prompt when battery goes below ......... wait for it........ 40% .....
> Like why would anybody programmed it like that ? And it prompts you every 20seconds.....
> Guess every BT manufactured in china has that haha. Remember testing BT headphones from Ali that had same annoying crap.


Thats a bummer, pretty annoying. On mine non saber i start getting notifications at around 20% and have around 1 hour runtime left.
Battery indicators arent that precise,  yours might be bit more off, how much playtime you have left when it starts with the warnings?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Wow I just realised in my Hiby W3 Saber there's annoying "low battery" voice prompt when battery goes below ......... wait for it........ 40% .....
> Like why would anybody programmed it like that ? And it prompts you every 20seconds.....
> Guess every BT manufactured in china has that haha. Remember testing BT headphones from Ali that had same annoying crap.



It might not even be 40% actually, but a much lower voltage threshold. Most of these battery percentage shown on your smartphone is a rough estimation by the BT adapter SoC and they are known to be not particularly accurate. I'll venture a guess the actual low voltage that triggered the low battery warning might be lower than 40%.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> It might not even be 40% actually, but a much lower voltage threshold. Most of these battery percentage shown on your smartphone is a rough estimation by the BT adapter SoC and they are known to be not particularly accurate. I'll venture a guess the actual low voltage that triggered the low battery warning might be lower than 40%.



Might be - Also apparently they released  0.1 update for W3 Saber


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> Might be - Also apparently they released  0.1 update for W3 Saber



IIRC, my W3 Saber already has the 0.1 firmware as stock when it arrived.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

ClieOS said:


> IIRC, my W3 Saber already has the 0.1 firmware as stock when it arrived.



Mine wasn't though


----------



## nabuhodonozor

When I use my Hiby with PC I can't seem to get consistent play/pause functionality . Once it connects and when adjusting volume it seems to manipulate Windows volume and then play/pause works but other time seems like Win volume works independent of Hiby and play/pause doesn't work.Is there any way to make it consisten?


----------



## ClieOS

nabuhodonozor said:


> When I use my Hiby with PC I can't seem to get consistent play/pause functionality . Once it connects and when adjusting volume it seems to manipulate Windows volume and then play/pause works but other time seems like Win volume works independent of Hiby and play/pause doesn't work.Is there any way to make it consisten?



Seems llikelly your Windows BT driver might not have engaged properly sometime (*sometime it will crash without any sign). My suggestion is to restart your BT driver if possible, or just open up the Windows' BT setting in the control panel might help.


----------



## DeJaVu (Feb 16, 2021)

@laevi
Got the UP2 yesterday, so here are my impressions vs. W3(and supposedly btr3k as they should sound pretty similar).Both were tested with slow filter.

They have pretty similar warmish tonality. Up2 has bit clearer mids and might sound tiny bit more forward because of that(w3 has them smoother), better highs extension adding to detail perception. I was swapping between them numerous times to catch the subtle differences.
But the thing that you notice right away and is in your face is that Up2 adds bit more in the lowest end, and has better bass control. Its more punchy while the hiby w3 is looser and sounds bit more voluminous because of that. Soundstage is tiny bit bigger on Up2. The control wheel is a joy to work with, no more trying to find the right button when its out of sight .
More or less its what i expected, except the bass, that got me by surprise, and it was a pleasant one. I do prefer a tighter bass. Someone might prefer the former as it can complement music with reverb, and imo w3 sounds tiny bit better with acoustic music i have.UP2 is close though with acoustic, but better with metal and in congested tracks in general due to better detail in the mids and also hiphop/electronic music due to that nice bass punch it provides.

One more thing worth noting is that while in the shanling thread its stated that eq doesnt work over LDAC, it does work  if you switch sample rate to 44/48kHz, though it has some quirks by sometimes not activating unless you open the app and move one of the eq sliders. Havent had the time to play with it much so i can figure all the scenarios.
Firmware on the UP2 seems more buggy than the W3, in the 20-30 pairings, recconnects, codecs switching(including software HWA through Hibymusic) at short intervals, i had it freeze 2 times with solid light on and unable to turn it off no matter how long i held the button pressed. Connecting to pc in usb dac mode and disconnecting resolved it both times. I assume this shouldnt be a problem with normal use, connect to 2 devices and forget, or occasional device switching.

Edit:
Forgot to add that UP2 charges the battery with 220ma, which is just about right for the 400Mah battery. Another nice thing that can help you get longer life from the battery is that the charging light goes off shortly after it finishes the CC phase and reaches CV phase, so if you manage to remove it every time at that point youll be probably getting 2-3x battery cycles from the battery(it would be at about 85% charge if removed straight away when light goes off).
Not ideal as it doesnt stop charging at that point, but at least you have some sort of an indication, and youll manage on purpose or not, to get it off the charger at that point at least some of the times you charge it.

I must say i do prefer UP2 over W3,  and it will replace it for the time being. A new piece of gear bias ofcourse plays a role in that decision . Though i doubt it will change as i do like the sound of it better, added power, cool wheel with fine grain volume steps, and has all important to me soft features as hiby and the some more, like disabling codecs(nice for transmitters that you cant force a codec on).
So long story short, going from my first impression i would recommend UP2 over the  W3, if money is no object.
Otherwise for price with coupons of around $40-45(compared to $75 i paid for the up2) on aliexpress,  hiby cant be beat in the value per $.


@ClieOS  You were saying that youre using high gain and volume limit to have better volume control on the original W3. So thing is , i tested the W3 with 1kHz sine wave, and switching to high gain doesnt increase even a 0.1db at the output(connected to Xonar D2 input) . Are you sure that function actually works on the W3, or is it just mine? On the UP2 the switch is very noticeable, its what made me test the W3.


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> @laevi
> @ClieOS  You were saying that youre using high gain and volume limit to have better volume control on the original W3. So thing is , i tested the W3 with 1kHz sine wave, and switching to high gain doesnt increase even a 0.1db at the output(connected to Xonar D2 input) . Are you sure that function actually works on the W3, or is it just mine? On the UP2 the switch is very noticeable, its what made me test the W3.




I don't recall saying that I am using my W3 on high gain. I think I said something along the line that W3 volume steps were too wide when I was using low gain, so maximum volume needed to be capped (*via the 'fine tuned' function in Hiby Blue). I don't recall I ever compared high vs. low gain in W3 since low gain is usually already too loud for me.


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> I don't recall saying that I am using my W3 on high gain. I think I said something along the line that W3 volume steps were too wide when I was using low gain, so maximum volume needed to be capped (*via the 'fine tuned' function in Hiby Blue). I don't recall I ever compared high vs. low gain in W3 since low gain is usually already too loud for me.


Checks out, i just reread the messages.You were refering to lower volume level as low gain, so i must have misinterpreted it and memorized incorectly.


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> Checks out, i just reread the messages.You were refering to lower volume level as low gain, so i must have misinterpreted it and memorized incorectly.



I just checked via a multimeter - you are right that the low/high gain setting on W3 doesn't really do anything.

p/s Just checked W3S as well - same thing, gain setting has no effect.


----------



## DeJaVu (Feb 17, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> I just checked via a multimeter - you are right that the low/high gain setting on W3 doesn't really do anything.
> 
> p/s Just checked W3S as well - same thing, gain setting has no effect.


How do you check for that with a multimeter? Plug in a jack with exposed connections, connect a resistor and measure voltage? Or no resistor but just measure the voltage on the exposed connections?


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> How do you check for that with a multimeter? Plug in a jack with exposed connections, connect a resistor and measure voltage? Or no resistor but just measure the voltage on the exposed connections?



I just used an interconnecting 3.5mm-to-3.5mm cable. You don't need a load for measuring max voltage output (which is what gain setting is), but a good multimeter that can measure frequency will help.


----------



## DeJaVu (Feb 17, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> I just used an interconnecting 3.5mm-to-3.5mm cable. You don't need a load for measuring max voltage output (which is what gain setting is), but a good multimeter that can measure frequency will help.


If i understand correctly , load is only needed to measure power output?

BTW, im getting itchy for additional bt device. How is BTR3K compared to W3, do they actually sound same, close to indiscernable or something else?
Also have you listened to LC-BT2, and how does it compare to hiby W3 and BTR3K?
MW200 is also one im considering, any thoughts about that one?

Edit:
You have a typo on the first page, MSRP for W3 Saber is $59, not $45


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> If i understand correctly , load is only needed to measure power output?



Not just power output, but others like THD ad output impedance, just not for maximum voltage out in this case.



DeJaVu said:


> BTW, im getting itchy for additional bt device. How is BTR3K compared to W3, do they actually sound same, close to indiscernable or something else?
> Also have you listened to LC-BT2, and how does it compare to hiby W3 and BTR3K?
> MW200 is also one im considering, any thoughts about that one?



Similar in sound signature, but on par (*single ended) / better (*balanced) as BTR3K runs on two AK4377A where W3 utilizes just a single AK4377 (*not the same chip, AK4377A is a simpler, slightly lesser performing but better battery optimized version of  AK4377).

Never listened to LC-BT2 or MW200 before.



DeJaVu said:


> Edit:
> You have a typo on the first page, MSRP for W3 Saber is $59, not $45



Not a typo. That number came from Hiby own Taobao store, which is almost always cheaper than Hiby own international store. There is also Hiby Aliexpress store, pricing W3S at around USD$55 (and currently discounted to USD$50).


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> Not just power output, but others like THD ad output impedance, just not for maximum voltage out in this case.


Noted, thanks.



ClieOS said:


> Similar in sound signature, but on par (*single ended) / better (*balanced) as BTR3K runs on two AK4377A where W3 utilizes just a single AK4377 (*not the same chip, AK4377A is a simpler, slightly lesser performing but better battery optimized version of AK4377).


What aspects exactly of the sound are better on the balanced?



ClieOS said:


> Never listened to LC-BT2 or MW200 before.


Now thats a hole in the material on the subject, cmon gotta test those too and get that additional knowledge, and as a bonus make it easier for us to choose 



ClieOS said:


> Not a typo. That number came from Hiby own Taobao store, which is almost always cheaper than Hiby own international store. There is also Hiby Aliexpress store, pricing W3S at around USD$55 (and currently discounted to USD$50).


Oh ok. I know about other places prices, but always considered prices from that address as MSRP. Kind of made sense to me since MSRP for the original W3 is set at $59 while it was cheaper say on aliexpress.


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> What aspects exactly of the sound are better on the balanced?



Cleaner, wider image / separation and soundstage, plus more output power + tighter control.


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> Cleaner, wider image / separation and soundstage, plus more output power + tighter control.


More or less how i described the differences and what i liked about UP2 vs. W3. This one might be the ultimate eh, 2 in 1 . 
By tighter control, do you also mean the bass, does it tighten and get punchier but still full bodied over balanced?


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> By tighter control, do you also mean the bass, does it tighten and get punchier but still full bodied over balanced?



Didn't compare the single-ended between W3 and BTR3K that much in detail. There isn't a lot of reason to use the single-ended output on BTR3K when balanced output is clearly better.


----------



## FiiO Willson

ClieOS said:


> There is nothing, technical and size wise, that is going to be a lot better than what there is inside BTR5, so making a BTR7 or BTR9 will not likely going to make a lot of sense unless FiiO is planning something bigger in size. Then again, making something bigger will loss the major benefit of continence and therefore restricting the market (*it will be have to be marketed toward DAC/amp users rather than BT adapter users). Then again, for those who indeed looking for ultimate performance, FiiO already has the Q5s. If anything, intermediate sized BT device such as the Oriolus 1795 has proven that it has compromised too much in size to be popular. I think the next major effort for FiiO should be moving the "BTR5K" to the QCC51xx platform, as CSR8675 has seen its better days and currently is being phased out by Qualcomm. The extra processing power of the QCC51xx series will open up a lot of possibility that simplify can't be done on CSR8675.


Hi
It seems you know our products too well
Most of what you said is correct
Thank you very much for your explanation and clarification to everyone


----------



## DeJaVu

FiiO Willson said:


> Hi
> It seems you know our products too well
> Most of what you said is correct
> Thank you very much for your explanation and clarification to everyone


Show the man some appreciation, hes missing LC-BT2 from that list on the first page  



ClieOS said:


> Didn't compare the single-ended between W3 and BTR3K that much in detail. There isn't a lot of reason to use the single-ended output on BTR3K when balanced output is clearly better.


That previous question was regarding BTR3K, comparing its SE to its Balanced, not SE between those two. If on SE theyre about the same, Im trying to understand(not an easy task understanding how something sounds by reading text  ) does BTR3K sound close to the UP2 on balanced out. Would be ideal if it could replace both the W3 and UP2.
BTW, have you listened to UP2 by any chance?


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> That previous question was regarding BTR3K, comparing its SE to its Balanced, not SE between those two. If on SE theyre about the same, Im trying to understand(not an easy task understanding how something sounds by reading text  ) does BTR3K sound close to the UP2 on balanced out. Would be ideal if it could replace both the W3 and UP2.
> BTW, have you listened to UP2 by any chance?



BTR3K SE and Bal is fairly similar, just (*SE) not as grand in presentation / wide in image and not quite as power. 

BTR3K SE is slightly less warm / more neutral than W3 and UP2.


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> BTR3K SE and Bal is fairly similar, just (*SE) not as grand in presentation / wide in image and not quite as power.
> 
> BTR3K SE is slightly less warm / more neutral than W3 and UP2.


Thanks, i suppose ill be getting one. Been eying it for some time, so i guess its about time to hear one in person.


----------



## DeJaVu

ClieOS said:


> BTR3K SE and Bal is fairly similar, just (*SE) not as grand in presentation / wide in image and not quite as power.
> 
> BTR3K SE is slightly less warm / more neutral than W3 and UP2.


Thanks, i suppose ill be getting one. Been eying it for some time, so i guess its about time to hear one in person.


----------



## FiiO Willson

DeJaVu said:


> Thanks, i suppose ill be getting one. Been eying it for some time, so i guess its about time to hear one in person.



I think you may need BTR5


----------



## DeJaVu

FiiO Willson said:


> I think you may need BTR5


Im sure its a great device but cant get over the size/weight of it(need it as portable as it can be), and also lack of some features i wouldnt mind having that competition at that price point has. So ill be waiting for the next iteration that you make more in line with Qudelix 5K or better. Small/light, EQ(with saveable custom profiles) that works over LDAC/USB DAC, directly powered from usb(bypassing battery) in USB DAC mode and hopefully bt 5.2 with BLE Audio and LC3 so you have 1 up over them. Im sure you can do it, and then well have a deal . 
For now the BTR3K will have to do, gotta check what that one is about. There will be time for the rest of your production, you do have some enticing devices.


----------



## DeJaVu (Feb 20, 2021)

I know it is pretty important part of these kind of devices for me, so here are some Mic tests for Hiby W3 and Shanling UP2 in case anyone else is interested. Done in a quiet environment.





And in this post there are some samples from Fiio BTR3 and Qudelix 5K

Edit: Replaced UP2 samples with recording from OBS(no boost, 6db and 12db boost), turned out windows recorder attenuates the mic quite a bit. Didnt bother rerecording W3 sample, as its already clear that its a pretty bad mic.


----------



## Gus Bxxxwood (Feb 25, 2021)

Saltjo said:


> Every time I touched the housing itself I could hear it on the headphone, irrespective of the headphones. The same headphones did have nothing similar with the FiiO btr3, so I guess it should be independent of the cables. Maybe the es100 was faulty. I sent it back as it really was annoying.


You probably have the microphone turned on. Make sure it's turned off and see if that doesn't solve the problem.
EDIT - oof! I didn't read the last sentence, sorry. Regardless, I know someone who had the same problem with the Q5k. Turning off the mic fixed it.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

Is battery drain different in BT mode when compared to DAC mode ? If I was to connect my W3 via BT while still charging it through USB when I'm at my desk ,would that drain battery a bit faster making that fluctuation from drained to almost fully charge more "healthy"? Or it makes no difference?

That's my 5head idea for today


----------



## DeJaVu (Feb 27, 2021)

nabuhodonozor said:


> Is battery drain different in BT mode when compared to DAC mode ? If I was to connect my W3 via BT while still charging it through USB when I'm at my desk ,would that drain battery a bit faster making that fluctuation from drained to almost fully charge more "healthy"? Or it makes no difference?
> 
> That's my 5head idea for today


Ideally you would charge it turned off(not from pc as it automatically turns on in usb dac mode).
But given that we all charge phones being on or while using them, and batteries last many years, seems that it doesnt have very noticeable effect and i wouldnt worry too much about that. Only thing you could do is not charge it till the end while using it, as the CV phase will be longer because of that(kept at max voltage).Not hard to stop charging early(say at 80%), so at least you can benefit from that.


----------



## nabuhodonozor

DeJaVu said:


> Ideally you would charge it turned off(not from pc as it automatically turns on in usb dac mode).
> But given that we all charge phones being on or while using them, and batteries last many years, seems that it doesnt have very noticeable effect and i wouldnt worry too much about that. Only thing you could do is not charge it till the end while using it, as the CV phase will be longer because of that(kept at max voltage).Not hard to stop charging early(say at 80%), so at least you can benefit from that.



That's why I'm asking - if BT drains battery faster it would never reach 100% but be slowly charging via USB and maybe stay around 60-90% depending on usage. That being said Hiby's tech support assured me it can be used in DAC mode all day without affecting the battery ,but who knows if they just want me to F-off.


----------



## DeJaVu

nabuhodonozor said:


> That's why I'm asking - if BT drains battery faster it would never reach 100% but be slowly charging via USB and maybe stay around 60-90% depending on usage. That being said Hiby's tech support assured me it can be used in DAC mode all day without affecting the battery ,but who knows if they just want me to F-off.


All my recommendations are what would be ideal. It will affect the battery longevity otherwise, but by how much i couldnt say in this use case scenario, and i doubt anyone could as im not aware of any tests done regarding that. So you can donate 2x W3 to me, and after 6 months or a year of different types of use ill measure the battery capacity left and ill give you the answer. Better yet 4x W3, so we have control minimize probability of faulty battery out of the box skewing the results . 
Not quite the same scenario, but as an example lithium battery stored at room temperature 100% charged(with no usage at all) after one year it will only have 80% of its original capacity left. Stored at 40% charge it will have 96% of original capacity.

Like was previously stated, most important and easy to follow rule is not charging and discharging it till the end. Biggest difference is not charging to the end, every 0.1v less than max voltage doubles the cycles from previous level. Discharging has lesser effect than that, but still significant. Rule of thumb not hard to follow 30-80%


----------



## UnityIsPower (Mar 5, 2021)

Been happy with the Q5K and BTR3K, headphone and car use respectively. One thing missing from the 5K that the 3K has is the ability to rename the device. I was able to give the 3K the name of my car, which is sweet. I would have appreciated AptX LL on the Q5K but reason given is understandable. @ClieOS any recent experience with SBC XQ mate?

Main reason I went with the Q5K on my headphones is the PEQ. While the BTR3K has AptX LL and is slimmer, its glass finish did not allow command strips to adhere properly and the app experience has been suboptimal.


Spoiler: Photos


----------



## ClieOS

UnityIsPower said:


> ... @ClieOS any recent experience with SBC XQ mate?



Last I check, SBC XQ is limited to LineageOS only. Since I don't have any LineageOS devices, I can't tried it out.


----------



## DeJaVu (Mar 5, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> Last I check, SBC XQ is limited to LineageOS only. Since I don't have any LineageOS devices, I can't tried it out.


Not available anymore in Lineage OS. As far as i recall it got introduced in android 8 based lineage 15 and continued in android 9 based Lineage 16. Android 10 and 11(lineage 17 and 18) dont have the option anymore.
You can also play with SBC bitrate on linux loaded with pulseaudio-modules-bt. Oracle Virtualbox is your friend. @UnityIsPower
​


----------



## Mytherion

hi guys, for BTR5 owner, I hope my question is not OOT, what is your best IEM that you pair BTR5 with? I only have Shozy Form 1.1 and I got a little bit sibilance when the volume is a little bit above average. Music that I listen the most are J-pop, k-pop, ballad and EDM.

I tried to choose different filter but I haven't found any noticeable differences, or maybe you have any tips to reduce the sibilance besides lowering the volume below average? Fyi, my BTR5 volume is 40, while my phone volume is around 2/3 bars.


----------



## ClieOS

Mytherion said:


> hi guys, for BTR5 owner, I hope my question is not OOT, what is your best IEM that you pair BTR5 with? I only have Shozy Form 1.1 and I got a little bit sibilance when the volume is a little bit above average. Music that I listen the most are J-pop, k-pop, ballad and EDM.
> 
> I tried to choose different filter but I haven't found any noticeable differences, or maybe you have any tips to reduce the sibilance besides lowering the volume below average? Fyi, my BTR5 volume is 40, while my phone volume is around 2/3 bars.



BTR5 has a flat 20Hz to 20kHz output with very low output impedance (*= little to no impedance interaction) so whatever sibilance you heard is from the IEM. Digital filters can affect subtlety how the music is 'stitched' together, but they don't affect the output frequency response overall and therefore will not cause or reduce sibilance. Again, your IEM is the source of the sibilance. As of why you only notice your IEM's sibilance at certain volume and above - that's because human hearing is not linear. Our sensitivity to certain frequency changes with different loudness, it is referred as equal-loudness contour.

Also, when using multiple devices in-chain and they each have their own volume control (*especially if they have software volume control) - that normal best practice is to set all the devices's volume to max and only use the last device to control the volume, otherwise there is a good chance you will be losing a few (*digital) bits and thus degrading the SQ.


----------



## DeJaVu

Mytherion said:


> or maybe you have any tips to reduce the sibilance besides lowering the volume below average


EQ down at 8kHz and maybe bit on the 4kHz band(as its around 6-8kHz where the sibilants live) if youre using modes that support EQ. Otherwise try different tips, narrower bore will reduce the highs and maybe softer material but imo not to the extent that bore affects the sound. Try foam also if you have it.


----------



## Mytherion

ClieOS said:


> BTR5 has a flat 20Hz to 20kHz output with very low output impedance (*= little to no impedance interaction) so whatever sibilance you heard is from the IEM. Digital filters can affect subtlety how the music is 'stitched' together, but they don't affect the output frequency response overall and therefore will not cause or reduce sibilance. Again, your IEM is the source of the sibilance. As of why you only notice your IEM's sibilance at certain volume and above - that's because human hearing is not linear. Our sensitivity to certain frequency changes with different loudness, it is referred as equal-loudness contour.
> 
> Also, when using multiple devices in-chain and they each have their own volume control (*especially if they have software volume control) - that normal best practice is to set all the devices's volume to max and only use the last device to control the volume, otherwise there is a good chance you will be losing a few (*digital) bits and thus degrading the SQ.


thanks for the knowledge, I just realized why it seems I'm missing some SQ.



DeJaVu said:


> EQ down at 8kHz and maybe bit on the 4kHz band(as its around 6-8kHz where the sibilants live) if youre using modes that support EQ. Otherwise try different tips, narrower bore will reduce the highs and maybe softer material but imo not to the extent that bore affects the sound. Try foam also if you have it.


thanks for the tips, since BTR5 not yet support SQ in LDAC, I had to use Spotify EQ, which only have 4kHz, it really does help me greatly reduce sibilance by reducing it 10db. Although it change the sound signature a little bit, but I can bear with it 🙏

another question please, is BTR5 sound signature and quality will greatly different with HiBy R3 Pro Saber since they have different tuning despite same DAC? of course the comparison are using same IEM and codec. I know that they are different devices, but since I might only use it for streaming Spotify from my phone, I want to know if it's worth to buy the DAP, or should I just stick with BTR5?


----------



## DeJaVu

Mytherion said:


> thanks for the tips, since BTR5 not yet support SQ in LDAC, I had to use Spotify EQ, which only have 4kHz, it really does help me greatly reduce sibilance by reducing it 10db. Although it change the sound signature a little bit, but I can bear with it 🙏


10db seems bit overkill, especially with spotify EQ with only 5 bands. I never used it, but due to only 5 bands i assume it cuts pretty wide. Maybe try SpotEQ 31 band from playstore, it might work with your setup. Or even better if youre rooted JamesDSP or Viper4Android system wide eq.
Also its a good idea to try using aptx HD, as the tiny bit of quality you would loose due to the codec, might be well made up by the finer EQ that btr5 has and not change your sound signature as much as spotify EQ.

As for getting a DAP... Imo better investment for the price of the R3 Saber would be getting few more different sounding wired/wireless dongles for your phone. Youll never have the freedom of apps you use with a DAP. And for the price of the r3 having 2-5 dac/amps(depending what you go for) with different sound will always win in my book, variety never hurts.

Havent heard the shozy, but from reviews i figure they have fast emphasized bass and emphasized highs(v shape). From what i have i think Hiby W3 could be good pair for them. It will loosen up the bass a bit and give it bit more mass/grandnesss, highs arent that emphasized and has some musicality to its signature(longer note susstain) that will make the BA sound bit softer. Opposed to BTR3K that is more neutral and with bassy iems bass might sound bit out of place to my ears because of the lack of that musicality W3 has. 
Shaling UP2 also has that musicality im talking about, and might be a better fit for you if btr5(never heard it) is as dry as the btr3k, but still has the highs so you still might get the sibilance the btr5 gives you with your set, idk. Will bring the mids more to the front compared to W3.

Since youre sort of used to v shape because of your iems,  imo best fit for btr5 would probably be single dynamic driver v or slightly v shape signature. Youll get softer highs due to the nature of the dynamic driver, and combined with the detail of the 9218 will probably bring them somewhere in the middle between dynamic and ba.
But again i have to emphasize that my impression is from gathering info, deducting, and assuming that it is tuned in line with same sounding philosophy as the btr3k and having some general specifics of the 9218DAC/amp , not actually listening to the btr5. And someone that has both your set and the btr5 can give you better insight.


----------



## Mytherion (Mar 15, 2021)

DeJaVu said:


> 10db seems bit overkill, especially with spotify EQ with only 5 bands. I never used it, but due to only 5 bands i assume it cuts pretty wide. Maybe try SpotEQ 31 band from playstore, it might work with your setup. Or even better if youre rooted JamesDSP or Viper4Android system wide eq.
> Also its a good idea to try using aptx HD, as the tiny bit of quality you would loose due to the codec, might be well made up by the finer EQ that btr5 has and not change your sound signature as much as spotify EQ.
> 
> As for getting a DAP... Imo better investment for the price of the R3 Saber would be getting few more different sounding wired/wireless dongles for your phone. Youll never have the freedom of apps you use with a DAP. And for the price of the r3 having 2-5 dac/amps(depending what you go for) with different sound will always win in my book, variety never hurts.
> ...


Tried your advice on lowering the codec into aptx HD and use FiiO EQ, it certainly better than using Spotify EQ. Now I'm comfortable with 35 volume and this EQ in pic. Thanks a lot 👍





For the best single DD IEM around $100-250 to be paired with BTR5, I'm planning to buy Final Audio A3000, but I do concern about the sound signature, since the latest review on this forum said it's not suited for EDM and Pop genre, which are my playlist. What do you think about this? Or maybe do you have any single DD IEM recommendation around that price that suitable for my BTR5 and my genre?

I very appreciate for your answer and suggestions, I actually not planning to buy another bluetooth DAC/AMP if the reason is to find a perfect pair for my Shozy Form 1.1, or having different variety of choice, since I satisfied with my BTR5. The reasons I want to buy DAP are I want the bidirectional bluetooth feature for my future TWS/IEM and bigger battery capacity, since BTR5 can't transmit and only have around 6-8 hours playback.

Sony NW-A55 also one of DAP that I consider, but it doesn't have 2.5 balanced output, and quite big.


----------



## maserluv

Hi any owner can advise if it drive a B&O H6 effortlessly?
Regards Wayne


----------



## DeJaVu (Mar 16, 2021)

Mytherion said:


> Tried your advice on lowering the codec into aptx HD and use FiiO EQ, it certainly better than using Spotify EQ. Now I'm comfortable with 35 volume and this EQ in pic. Thanks a lot 👍


By looking at the eq, you didnt lower the sibilant area, but you did cover it by increasing the bass frequencies. If you lacked bass then thats one way to do it, if you have too much bass, just reduce 8kHz and maybe tiny bit of 4kHz like i previously said.



Mytherion said:


> For the best single DD IEM around $100-250 to be paired with BTR5, I'm planning to buy Final Audio A3000, but I do concern about the sound signature, since the latest review on this forum said it's not suited for EDM and Pop genre, which are my playlist. What do you think about this? Or maybe do you have any single DD IEM recommendation around that price that suitable for my BTR5 and my genre?


Best is a very subjective term. As for the comment them not being suited for EDM and Pop, i find it pretty strange in general. Maybe if they have lackluster bass response? Otherwise EDM and Pop are not very demanding genres. As audiophilia is about chasing the iems/headphones with which you would get the sound of the instruments as they would sound in real life. And most of EDM and plenty of Pop is basically electronic music, and no real reference to real instruments as you cant know how it was meant to sound, so it comes to subjective prefference of how a certain track sounds.
Only Single DD i have is the Blon 03, and they really shine with Shanling UP2 so i assume theyll be great with BTR5 too. Paired with medium soft medium bore tips(Im using ones that came with QOA Vesper so cant point you to the exact ones, but im sure youll manage to find something similar), and an upgraded cable.
And looking at the EQ you did(increasing the mids too) i think youll love their signature as theyre just slight warm. Great meaty bass which the btr5 should tighten a bit and make even better, very slightly recessed but great vocals, and great soft highs with cymbals sounding just about the right length and no sibilance as far as my hearing is concerned. The increased detail from the btr5 should make them even better.
If you dont have them id say get them, not an expensive venture either way.
As for the Final Audio A3000 im sure theres a thread here, and people that already used them with BTR5, so probably a better place to ask about them.



Mytherion said:


> I actually not planning to buy another bluetooth DAC/AMP if the reason is to find a perfect pair for my Shozy Form 1.1, or having different variety of choice, since I satisfied with my BTR5. The reasons I want to buy DAP are I want the bidirectional bluetooth feature for my future TWS/IEM and bigger battery capacity, since BTR5 can't transmit and only have around 6-8 hours playback.


You might know this but still worth mentioning, TWS wont benefit from a dap sound quality wise, would be same as connecting them to your phone. And at rare situation the btr5 might run out of power you can plug it in your phone(id rather invest those 200$ that you would spend on a dap in a phone with 5000Mah battery), or get a small and cheap powerbank that will be usefull to either top up your btr5 or the phone itself if needed. And if you want the DAP so youre able to transmit aptxHD/LDAC from PC, theres more convenient solutions like Fiio BTA30, or few software based solutions for free if youre willing to put in the time requiered to configure your setup. But up to you what you decide in the end.


----------



## Mytherion (Mar 17, 2021)

DeJaVu said:


> By looking at the eq, you didnt lower the sibilant area, but you did cover it by increasing the bass frequencies. If you lacked bass then thats one way to do it, if you have too much bass, just reduce 8kHz and maybe tiny bit of 4kHz like i previously said.


Strangely, even though the I'm not lowering any 4 or 8kHz on the EQ, the sibilance got much better when I turn on the FiiO EQ, even with normal settings with all 0 dB, the sound signature suddenly change when I turn on the EQ, Idk how that could happened. That's why I just duplicate the Dance EQ in FiiO EQ, which I found a good match for my sound signature and turn down the 4 and 8 kHZ into 0 dB, there are still some sibilance in some song after I listen for hours, so finally I turn it down 2.0 dB for both 4 and 8 kHz. I did miss the perfect cymbals sound though. When I'm using Soundmagic E10C in 3.5mm output, they sound very great without sibilance in any songs and without EQ though.



> Best is a very subjective term. As for the comment them not being suited for EDM and Pop, i find it pretty strange in general. Maybe if they have lackluster bass response? Otherwise EDM and Pop are not very demanding genres. As audiophilia is about chasing the iems/headphones with which you would get the sound of the instruments as they would sound in real life. And most of EDM and plenty of Pop is basically electronic music, and no real reference to real instruments as you cant know how it was meant to sound, so it comes to subjective prefference of how a certain track sounds.
> Only Single DD i have is the Blon 03, and they really shine with Shanling UP2 so i assume theyll be great with BTR5 too. Paired with medium soft medium bore tips(Im using ones that came with QOA Vesper so cant point you to the exact ones, but im sure youll manage to find something similar), and an upgraded cable.
> And looking at the EQ you did(increasing the mids too) i think youll love their signature as theyre just slight warm. Great meaty bass which the btr5 should tighten a bit and make even better, very slightly recessed but great vocals, and great soft highs with cymbals sounding just about the right length and no sibilance as far as my hearing is concerned. The increased detail from the btr5 should make them even better.
> If you dont have them id say get them, not an expensive venture either way.
> As for the Final Audio A3000 im sure theres a thread here, and people that already used them with BTR5, so probably a better place to ask about them.


I read great things too about BLON-03, definitely one of my watch list for a couple times, thanks for the recommendation, will read more about this IEM for sure before deciding to buy. And I will try to search more thread about A3000 then.



> You might know this but still worth mentioning, TWS wont benefit from a dap sound quality wise, would be same as connecting them to your phone. And at rare situation the btr5 might run out of power you can plug it in your phone(id rather invest those 200$ that you would spend on a dap in a phone with 5000Mah battery), or get a small and cheap powerbank that will be usefull to either top up your btr5 or the phone itself if needed. And if you want the DAP so youre able to transmit aptxHD/LDAC from PC, theres more convenient solutions like Fiio BTA30, or few software based solutions for free if youre willing to put in the time requiered to configure your setup. But up to you what you decide in the end.


Actually I did read it somewhere, but I doubt it, but since you mentioned it again, then it's true LOL. Then my main quest will be changed into find more variety IEM to be paired with my BTR5, but if I found cheap preloved HiBy R3 Pro Saber, I might still snatch it though LOL. I do have powerbank to juice up my BTR5, but I feel bad for my BTR5 since charging it while using it will cause quite a heat to it, so I mostly charge it when I don't use it, to preserve it's battery and hardware quality.

After trials and error, I found out the sibilance culprit, it's my TRI Through 4 core single crystal copper 2.5mm balanced cable which increase all frequency range, the Shozy original 3.5mm cable is doing fine as long as the volume is maxed out at 37 at my BTR5.


----------



## Nalin

Anybody here using Andromeda 2020, what will be the best option for them considering Output Impedance and all factors considered. 

Earlier used to have Shanling UP2, looking for upgrade in SQ if possible.


----------



## Caithang

With (TinHifi T4 - HZsound Mirror - FiiO F9pro - Sen ie40 pro - Final E2000 - Sony N1ap)

Qudelix5k > Hiby W3 > BTR5 > Up4 > BTR3k


----------



## ClieOS

Shanling is showing off UP5 on an Chinese audio show: Similar design as UP4 but larger, QCC5120 with a small screen, one 3.5mm single-ended, one 2.5mm balanced and one 4.4mm balanced output.


----------



## darmanastartes

The Hidizs H2 is a Bluetooth receiver with a single 3.5mm output. It normally retails for $64.99. Despite being relatively inexpensive, the H2 has a variety of shortcomings, including broken USB-C implementation, non-functional NFC, average battery life, and an uncompetitive companion app.

My full review is available on my blog: https://medium.com/bedrock-reviews/hidizs-h2-review-bb5b393a2129


----------



## waynes world

darmanastartes said:


> The Hidizs H2 is a Bluetooth receiver with a single 3.5mm output. It normally retails for $64.99. Despite being relatively inexpensive, the H2 has a variety of shortcomings, including broken USB-C implementation, non-functional NFC, average battery life, and an uncompetitive companion app.
> 
> My full review is available on my blog: https://medium.com/bedrock-reviews/hidizs-h2-review-bb5b393a2129



To the point review.



> Just save for a Qudelix 5K.



Ok, I will continue doing that!


----------



## Dobrescu George

I made a full video review about the HIDIZS H2 DAC/ AMP / Bluetooth receiver. Nice overall shape, ergonomics, low output power, but also low distortions  

Good overall deal


----------



## Mytherion

ClieOS said:


> Shanling is showing off UP5 on an Chinese audio show: Similar design as UP4 but larger, QCC5120 with a small screen, one 3.5mm single-ended, one 2.5mm balanced and one 4.4mm balanced output.


saw that just now, really interesting since it has 3 different output with dual dac mode for all of them


----------



## ClieOS

Shanling UP5 info update: MQA support is kinda curious (*though assuming it only works in USB DAC mode). Price is around $180, which definitely is on the expensive side of things. I do hope Shanling spends more time on getting it's app better this time around as the current app really does almost nothing.


----------



## alex5908 (Jun 9, 2021)

del


----------



## Shanling

ClieOS said:


> Shanling UP5 info update: MQA support is kinda curious (*though assuming it only works in USB DAC mode). Price is around $180, which definitely is on the expensive side of things. I do hope Shanling spends more time on getting it's app better this time around as the current app really does almost nothing.


Yep, MQA just for USB. There is no Bluetooth protocol that would work with MQA.

Same app, but with more settings for UP5.


----------



## ClieOS

Just placed an order for UP5.


----------



## holsen

ClieOS said:


> Just placed an order for UP5.


where? Where?  WHERE?   thanks!


----------



## ClieOS

holsen said:


> where? Where?  WHERE?   thanks!


Taobao.


----------



## holsen

Hey T


ClieOS said:


> Taobao.


Thanks.  I'll wait!


----------



## wwyjoe

Hifigo.com has listed too: https://hifigo.com/collections/new-arrival/products/shanling-up5


----------



## Nolbert0

ClieOS said:


> Just placed an order for UP5.


Curious to see (hear?) how it compares with the Qudelix 5K. Patiently awaiting your findings


----------



## ClieOS

Audirect Beam 3 Plus added to the list. Another one that supports MQA over USB.


----------



## maserluv

There is a new update with auto “OFF” feature. Cool!


----------



## ClieOS (Jun 29, 2021)

Received my UP5 yesterday - first impression is mixed. Build quality and design are similar to UP4, I definitely like the volume wheel. Sound quality on the other hand is, a bit bright and hallow, like there are some unwanted undertone of reverberation - I suspect this has a lot to do with the firmware, which is somewhat unstable. I reserved my judgement for now and wait for a Shanling to release a more stable firmware first before deciding whether UP5 is worth a recommendation or not. Listening was done on the 3.5mm only, both in single and dual DAC mode.


----------



## DeJaVu (Jun 29, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> like there are some unwanted undertone of reverberation - I suspect this has a lot to do with the firmware, which is somewhat unstable.


Have you tried the UP2 lately? As first run UP2 with the latest firmware(havent compared with older firmware) on mine has the same effect. Cant say that i mind it, i could even say that i kind of like it as it adds to the musicality(or maybe because i havent heard it without it , maybe it would sound even better without the reverb), though for sure it would depend what iems youre using it with.
In music its sort of subtle and it might be to some peoples(like me) liking, but its very prominently noticeable(and sort of ruins the sound) if you use it for watching media, namely materials with flat sound(mostly speech, for movies it sounds ok to me) like live or animated sitcoms(ex. tv show Bobs Burgers its what first brought it to my immediate attention, and could be heard very clearly).

Should i assume that with earlier firmware this effect isnt present on the UP2, as you didnt mention anything like this in your mini review(or maybe didnt notice it)? Might be interesting to try it out and see how it sounds without.


----------



## ClieOS

To me the reverberation sounds more like some kind of distortion, not something musical or natural that you will find in normal listening. I haven't listened to UP2 for awhile now, but I am pretty sure it has the latest firmware on my last listening and it doesn't have any odd reverberation.


----------



## DeJaVu

Im talking about tiny amount of reverb that imo complements music, nothing odd like youre describing, theres probably something else going on with the UP5. 
But just in case, would be curious if you could A/B them when you have the time, for science


----------



## brazy001 (Jul 2, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> Received my UP5 yesterday - first impression is mixed. Build quality and design are similar to UP4, I definitely like the volume wheel. Sound quality on the other hand is, a bit bright and hallow, like there are some unwanted undertone of reverberation - I suspect this has a lot to do with the firmware, which is somewhat unstable. I reserved my judgement for now and wait for a Shanling to release a more stable firmware first before deciding whether UP5 is worth a recommendation or not. Listening was done on the 3.5mm only, both in single and dual DAC mode.



Interested to hear your thoughts now after the firmware update just released.

My initial impression is a warmer/fuller sound which adds a sense of body to the sound. This is only in comparison to the dc04 dongle, which on the other hand has what I would call a more 'reference sound' with more defined edges to sounds.

I didn't think there would be much difference in DAC sounds (could be the in built amp responsibility) but here we are using the above terminology.

"Edit: after a couple hours of use, the difference I thought was apparent is definitely not so much anymore. (Burn in? Or my psychoacoustic receptors are playing up now/before). "

I can only go from memory, but this was also the impression from my (since sold) btr5. The sound that was materially identical to the 3.5mm output on my galaxy s10e.

Unfortunately someone else will have to do an A/B comparison. I opted to get a bt dac again because of the volume wheel and 4.4mm output for which I have cables.

Form factor is great, no clip but in my use case it will be in a pocket. (Which you need for your phone anyway). I might use the case if fingerprints get annoying.

"Edit: case reduces physical feedback of play/pause which already lacks the click of the volume wheel, making double press for skip track annoying"


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

ClieOS said:


> Received my UP5 yesterday - first impression is mixed. Build quality and design are similar to UP4, I definitely like the volume wheel. Sound quality on the other hand is, a bit bright and hallow, like there are some unwanted undertone of reverberation - I suspect this has a lot to do with the firmware, which is somewhat unstable. I reserved my judgement for now and wait for a Shanling to release a more stable firmware first before deciding whether UP5 is worth a recommendation or not. Listening was done on the 3.5mm only, both in single and dual DAC mode.


Would like to hear comparison with BTR5. Initial impressions of specs and features makes it an upgrade but we all know real life usage is very much different.


----------



## ClieOS

Just updated the UP5's firmware to 1.5.6. (and XMOS to 1.06) - everything seems to be in order now. The hollow, echoey sound is gone and it sings beautifully as it should. EQ works over LDAC just fine. Overall the impression with the new firmware so far is very positive. Will give it a few more days of testing and measurement before I'll write up the review.


----------



## greyforest

wish to see the comparison between beam3plus and qudelix


----------



## ClieOS

greyforest said:


> wish to see the comparison between beam3plus and qudelix



Having owned Atom pro and Beam 2, I have no doubt about Audirect's ability on making good sounding gear, but the use of CSR8675 is a bit discouraging to me. It is really an old generation of BT chip that has very limited capability. To be really competitive, they should have invested into QCC51xx.


----------



## greyforest

i went to the store and picked up a beam3plus after 10 hours of usage and one replacement i believe qudelix is still the best Bluetooth audio solution for now

beam 3 plus is more of a audio card built for smartphone rather than a Bluetooth device

in Bluetooth mode despite b3p have more power and controls than qudelix the imaging and frontal depth is not as good as qudelix

when connect to the phone b3p is really good maybe the best amongst similar product i would say its on par with ifi Diablo
 significantly better than oriolus 1795 

about the replacement my first b3p have a bulging battery after 2 hours of usage

so the quality control of beam 3 plus is problematic 

my second b3p have stiff button and also the led signal indication is different from the demo unit and first b3p

so overall i would suggest b3p for some over the ear headphones because the build quality i would not trust it on the go


----------



## ClieOS

Impression of Hiby W3 Saber and Shanling U)P5 added. See here.


----------



## holsen

ClieOS said:


> From upper left: Shanling UP5. UP4, UP2, FiiO BTR5, BTR3K, BTR3
> From lower left: TempoTec Blue, Qudelix 5K, EarStudio ES100, Hiby W3, W3Saber, W5
> 
> *[Impression] *
> ...


Still really appreciate the work you continue to put into this thread.   Thank you!


----------



## Ace Bee

How is the battery backup of UP5? I am using UP4, balanced mode. I get about 7 hours 45 minutes backup


----------



## ClieOS

Ace Bee said:


> How is the battery backup of UP5? I am using UP4, balanced mode. I get about 7 hours 45 minutes backup



Haven't had the time to do a battery rundown yet as the way I do battery test usually take the whole day. Shanling claimed UP5's battery life is roughly the same as UP4, and it probably is true going by experience.


----------



## Strifeff7

@ClieOS 
Hello, does the W3 or W5 or anything else support audio output via usb port ?
I want to use it as a bluetooth receiver for my dac,

thank you, 🙏


----------



## ClieOS

Strifeff7 said:


> @ClieOS
> Hello, does the W3 or W5 or anything else support audio output via usb port ?
> I want to use it as a bluetooth receiver for my dac,
> 
> thank you, 🙏



No portable Bluetooth headphone adapter / receiver of any kind can output digital audio signal via USB - it is, at least to my knowledge, impossible due to hardware limit. The Bluetooth SOC used in these BT adapter isn't powerful enough to support USB DAC. There are however small DAP that support both bi-directional Bluetooth (which means it can act like a portable BT adapter) as well as supporting USB-DAC function. For example, FiiO M5 and Shanling Q1. I am sure there are a few more that I can't remember, maybe from Hiby or Hidizs


----------



## gordec

Which of these adapters have the lowest noise floor/darkest background? I'm planning on getting one to use with Westone ES60 which is ultra sensitive.


----------



## 1Q84

Hi @ClieOS, i know its apples to oranges, but is it possible to compare Quedelix 5K with your LP W2?  Just interested how much better is the LP W2 in terms of SQ and resolution? Am torn between these two, just need a good dac/amp regardless of bluetooth. Thanks


----------



## Strifeff7

1Q84 said:


> Hi @ClieOS, i know its apples to oranges, but is it possible to compare Quedelix 5K with your LP W2?  Just interested how much better is the LP W2 in terms of SQ and resolution? Am torn between these two, just need a good dac/amp regardless of bluetooth. Thanks


W2 is comparable in sound quality to a $700+ DAP,
you will notice it immediately,
it's a future proof device, you can get a $2000+ iems in the future without a need to upgrade your source.


----------



## ClieOS

1Q84 said:


> Hi @ClieOS, i know its apples to oranges, but is it possible to compare Quedelix 5K with your LP W2?  Just interested how much better is the LP W2 in terms of SQ and resolution? Am torn between these two, just need a good dac/amp regardless of bluetooth. Thanks


No doubt that W2 is a class above 5K as far as both being purely as USB DAC. If you can afford W2 and has no use of Bluetooth, then W2 is the obvious choice. over 5K


----------



## 1Q84

Thanks very much for the replies guys, really appreciated


----------



## samuelguilan

Hi, anyone that has the Hiby W3 Saber tried using aptx LL and/or HD ?

I recently purchased one on the Aliexpress official store and had issues with these codecs. When using aptx HD there are frequent cuts in the audio and when using aptx LL there is just no sound.

I later contacted the store and they said the are aware of the problem, but didn't give any further explanation on it. I also saw that they removed aptx LL in both the Aliexpress store and their website.


----------



## ClieOS (Jul 20, 2021)

samuelguilan said:


> Hi, anyone that has the Hiby W3 Saber tried using aptx LL and/or HD ?
> 
> I recently purchased one on the Aliexpress official store and had issues with these codecs. When using aptx HD there are frequent cuts in the audio and when using aptx LL there is just no sound.
> 
> I later contacted the store and they said the are aware of the problem, but didn't give any further explanation on it. I also saw that they removed aptx LL in both the Aliexpress store and their website.




Tried aptX HD on W3s, no problem on my end. I suspected it is a case of unstable (*weak) BT connection in your case.

No sound on aptX LL is somewhat to be expected, as QCC5121 in W3s doesn't support aptX LL but rather aptX Adaptive (*though aptX Adaptive is not enable in W3s, AFAIK). I though Hiby might find a way to implement it, but I guess it is just that they copied and pasted old info from the original W3's spec sheet while simply forget to correct the info.


----------



## ClieOS

FiiO new BTR5 added to the list.

On spec, this one seems to be just a fairly *minor upgrade* over the original BTR5 mainly going from ES9218P to ES9019C - the two chips have almost identical performance on spec with the only difference being the latter supporting MQA - a feature most audiophiles can (and arguably should) do without. The decision to keep using CSR8675 is disappointing to say the least. I even question the need for anyone to upgrade if you already own an original BTR5.


----------



## ClieOS (Aug 18, 2021)

Pre-order of the new BTR5 has began in China, price is expected to be about the same as the original BTR5. Judging from the ads, the new BTR5 is indeed almost identical to the old BTR5 in circuit design, change from ES9218P to ES9219C probably has less to do with any actual upgrade but the fact that ESS is phasing out ES9218P and replacing it with ES9219C in an effort to push MQA to a wider audience. FiiO probably understands this and thus doesn't even bother to change the model name, as this is in essence more of a mid product lifecycle reversion rather than an true model upgrade.. In any case, I'll sit this one out as I see no valid reason to "upgrade" otherwise.


----------



## Gee Simpson

ClieOS said:


> Pre-order of the new BTR5 has began in China, price is expected to be about the same as the original BTR5. Judging from the ads, the new BTR5 is indeed almost identical to the old BTR5 in circuit design, change from ES9218P to ES9219C probably has less to do with any actual upgrade but the fact that ESS is phasing out ES9218P and replacing it with ES9219C in an effort to push MQA to a wider audience. FiiO probably understands this and thus doesn't even bother to change the model name, as this is in essence more of a mid product lifecycle reversion rather than an true model upgrade.. In any case, I'll sit this one out as I see no valid reason to "upgrade" otherwise.



Obviously no point in me waiting for the new one to release here in the UK then, I'll just go for the current one on AliExpress.


----------



## Repligon

Hi, I am looking for a Bluetooth audio adapter with a very specific and not advertised feature - being privacy friendly. Most of them have BLE and broadcast packets, called "advertisements", to announce their presence. The problem is most if not all adapter use public address that is unique for every device and, therefore, traceable. I already determined that Fiio, Shanling and Qudelix do this.
Could you install BLE scanner app (e.g. "nRF Connect") on unpaired phone and check which adapters either:

Don't show up in scan result
Have private address - maclookup.app can't find any manufacturer info on it and first letter of the address is less than 8. In this case address should also change for unpaired phone when turned off and on.


----------



## Paramekshu (Aug 23, 2021)

holsen said:


> where? Where?  WHERE?   thanks!


Musicteck website is where I ordered. Shipped next day, very responsive. They're located in New Jersey, so I got mine the following day.


----------



## Paramekshu (Aug 23, 2021)

Paramekshu said:


> Musicteck website is where I ordered my UP5. Shipped next day, very responsive. They're located in New Jersey, so I got mine the following day.


----------



## FiiO Willson

ClieOS said:


> FiiO new BTR5 added to the list.
> 
> I even question the need for anyone to upgrade if you already own an original BTR5.


Not need, Please wait BTR7


----------



## FiiO Willson

ClieOS said:


> Pre-order of the new BTR5 has began in China, price is expected to be about the same as the original BTR5. Judging from the ads, the new BTR5 is indeed almost identical to the old BTR5 in circuit design, change from ES9218P to ES9219C probably has less to do with any actual upgrade but the fact that ESS is phasing out ES9218P and replacing it with ES9219C in an effort to push MQA to a wider audience. FiiO probably understands this and thus doesn't even bother to change the model name, as this is in essence more of a mid product lifecycle reversion rather than an true model upgrade.. In any case, I'll sit this one out as I see no valid reason to "upgrade" otherwise.


Yes, the new BTR5 is only a reactive adjustment due to the shortage of chips
Compared to the old BTR5, the following changes were made.
1, change the DAC to ES9219C and add MQA support
2, added a convenient "Phone DAC" mode, can be more convenient for cell phone decoding (already launched is the Android version, soon the Apple version will also be launched)
3, standard with the C-C OTG cable, in addition to the function has also done some optimization

Although there are changes, but compared with the old version of the difference is not significant; so do not recommend the old version of the user update; 
can wait for BTR7, the new BTR7 is expected to be on sale in January 2022


----------



## ClieOS

FiiO Willson said:


> ...
> can wait for BTR7, the new BTR7 is expected to be on sale in January 2022



Now that's some exciting news!!!


----------



## povidlo

FiiO Willson said:


> Yes, the new BTR5 is only a reactive adjustment due to the shortage of chips
> Compared to the old BTR5, the following changes were made.
> 1, change the DAC to ES9219C and add MQA support
> 2, added a convenient "Phone DAC" mode, can be more convenient for cell phone decoding (already launched is the Android version, soon the Apple version will also be launched)
> ...


Please take the same cues from Qudelix app, your app is very weak in comparison (I use it with utws3).


----------



## Strifeff7 (Aug 25, 2021)

FiiO Willson said:


> Yes, the new BTR5 is only a reactive adjustment due to the shortage of chips
> Compared to the old BTR5, the following changes were made.
> 1, change the DAC to ES9219C and add MQA support
> 2, added a convenient "Phone DAC" mode, can be more convenient for cell phone decoding (already launched is the Android version, soon the Apple version will also be launched)
> ...


What the "Phone DAC" mode?


----------



## Caithang

povidlo said:


> Please take the same cues from Qudelix app, your app is very weak in comparison (I use it with utws3).


Yes, good idea


----------



## ClieOS

povidlo said:


> Please take the same cues from Qudelix app, your app is very weak in comparison (I use it with utws3).



Not that I don't agree, just that I don't think any manufacturer can approach the level of Qudelix's coding ability without major investment into a software team. It will take an exceptional software engineer to do what Qudelix does and generally this level of engineer is very hard to come by in China (*they usually work for big software company with much higher pay than what hardware company can offer).


----------



## FiiO Willson

Strifeff7 said:


> What the "Phone DAC" mode?


When you plug in your phone or charger, BTR5 will prompt you whether to charge, if you choose yes, then it will take power from your device, at this time consume the power of your device will be faster (so we recommend that you choose “yes” only when you connect the charger)

If you choose “no”, then BTR5 will only decode and only use its own battery, at this time, he is equivalent to some specialized decoder (such as DC04, W2, etc.), at this time, the benefit of BTR5 is not to consume the power of the phone

So I personally call it "Phone DAC mode"

This function is actually available in BTR5 before, but he can only open and close in the APP, not very convenient

We made a change this time by the way


----------



## FiiO Willson

ClieOS said:


> Not that I don't agree, just that I don't think any manufacturer can approach the level of Qudelix's coding ability without major investment into a software team. It will take an exceptional software engineer to do what Qudelix does and generally this level of engineer is very hard to come by in China (*they usually work for big software company with much higher pay than what hardware company can offer).


We actually have more capable software engineers as well; 
however, we differ from Qudelix in that we are more of a utility-based product that meets the needs of most users.

On the other hand, they have fewer products and do more in-depth and more detailed areas. They may be more competitive in one area, but the whole team is not necessarily more competitive than us


----------



## Strifeff7

FiiO Willson said:


> We actually have more capable software engineers as well;
> however, we differ from Qudelix in that we are more of a utility-based product that meets the needs of most users.
> 
> On the other hand, they have fewer products and do more in-depth and more detailed areas. They may be more competitive in one area, but the whole team is not necessarily more competitive than us


Hello,
Can you add the option to limit the battery charging to 90% or something,

charged a battery to full 100% everytime is not good for the battery longevity.


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge (Aug 26, 2021)

Strifeff7 said:


> Hello,
> Can you add the option to limit the battery charging to 90% or something,
> 
> charged a battery to full 100% everytime is not good for the battery longevity.


I think most devices never fully charge their batteries. The display is just to calm down OCD of consumers. Most of the times, powers stored in the battery is 5-10% less than what is displayed on the screen.


----------



## ClieOS

Qualcomm just announced aptx Lossless, an upgrade of aptx Adaptive and fully capable of bit-to-bit perfect 16/44.1 wireless transmission.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> Qualcomm just announced aptx Lossless, an upgrade of aptx Adaptive and fully capable of bit-to-bit perfect 16/44.1 wireless transmission.


Game changer.


----------



## Hanesu

monsieurfromag3 said:


> Game changer.


Wow! I suspect Apple is working on their own version of that, too!


----------



## Gee Simpson (Sep 2, 2021)

Now the BTR5 is back available in the UK (not sure if this is the new revised version or not), I'm choosing between two options.

Fiio BTR5 vs Qudelix 5K? I'll be using either via balanced, and I'm not bothered about EQ abilities.


----------



## Gee Simpson

Gee Simpson said:


> Now the BTR5 is back available in the UK (not sure if this is the new revised version or not), I'm choosing between two options.
> 
> Fiio BTR5 vs Qudelix 5K? I'll be using either via balanced, and I'm not bothered about EQ abilities.


Anyone? 🙂


----------



## rkw

Gee Simpson said:


> Anyone? 🙂


There are quite a few comments about BTR5 in the Qudelix 5K thread.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-qudelix-5k-thread.914628
I suggest you go there and run a search on "BTR5" (select the "This thread" search option).


----------



## Mouseman

Gee Simpson said:


> Anyone? 🙂


Even if you're not going to EQ, the 5k still has more tricks in the software that you might use.


----------



## ClieOS

If it is purely for portable, balanced output without any EQ, I would think they are about equal.


----------



## DeJaVu

Gee Simpson said:


> Now the BTR5 is back available in the UK (not sure if this is the new revised version or not), I'm choosing between two options.
> 
> Fiio BTR5 vs Qudelix 5K? I'll be using either via balanced, and I'm not bothered about EQ abilities.


Besides the PEQ, heres what else 5K has extra over the BTR5:
Smaller size and almost half the weight
Actually suited to be used as a wired DAC as it can be powered directly from USB bypassing the battery so it doesnt shorten the battery longevity.
Supported sample rate selection for codecs
A2DP Latency selection
USB mic function
Transparency mode for enabling the mic to hear surrounding.
Crosfeed DSP
Actual codec bitrate display
Bluetooth audio source priority
Much longer maximum Battery life(up to 20 hours)
Better antenna/range


----------



## Gee Simpson

Thanks for the replies guys 👍 I will likely use it as a USB DAC also.


----------



## ClieOS

iFi Audio GO Blue added to the list.

This thing looks gorgeous, but also with a steep price to match - US$199.


----------



## Hanesu

ClieOS said:


> iFi Audio GO Blue added to the list.
> 
> This thing looks gorgeous, but also with a steep price to match - US$199.


Waaaaaaa! Didn’t see that coming!!! Is there an extra thread for it?


----------



## ClieOS (Sep 10, 2021)

Hanesu said:


> Waaaaaaa! Didn’t see that coming!!! Is there an extra thread for it?



Usually @iFi audio will start an official thread on the sponsor forum, though I have not seen one yet. I'll just wait for them to post their own one.

[Update] Actually they did start a thread here: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/ifi-audio-go-blu-super-small-super-light-super-sound.959616/


----------



## iFi audio

ClieOS said:


> Usually @iFi audio will start an official thread on the sponsor forum, though I have not seen one yet. I'll just wait for them to post their own one.
> 
> [Update] Actually they did start a thread here: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/ifi-audio-go-blu-super-small-super-light-super-sound.959616/



We did indeed, though if you'd like you can make one about GO blu beyond the sponsor section. I wouldn't mind at all


----------



## Strifeff7

ClieOS said:


> iFi Audio GO Blue added to the list.
> 
> This thing looks gorgeous, but also with a steep price to match - US$199.


I really love the look of it,


----------



## ClieOS

Just placed an pre-order for the GO Blu, hopefully it won't take too long to arrive.


----------



## ballog

@ClieOS any news of the Aune BU2? https://hifigo.com/products/aune-bu2


----------



## ClieOS

ballog said:


> @ClieOS any news of the Aune BU2? https://hifigo.com/products/aune-bu2


Dunno, not really paying attention to full sized BT DAC/amp.


----------



## iFi audio

Strifeff7 said:


> I really love the look of it,



Same here, but the most surprising thing is how small that product is in reality. Photos don't quite communicate that


----------



## ClieOS

ClieOS said:


> Just placed an pre-order for the GO Blu, hopefully it won't take too long to arrive.


ETA: a week or two.


----------



## Strifeff7

I'm excited,
is there a clip?
or a case or something,
I want to use it while jogging/workout,
@iFi audio


----------



## Barusu Lamperouge

Strifeff7 said:


> I'm excited,
> is there a clip?
> or a case or something,
> I want to use it while jogging/workout,
> @iFi audio


Just a carry pouch. Clip and case is under deliberation per ifi's spokesperson.


----------



## iFi audio

Barusu Lamperouge said:


> Clip and case is under deliberation per ifi's spokesperson.



Yes, we're discussing it indeed @Strifeff7


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Who’s up for a cuppa?
A “portable Tone2 Pro” incoming.


----------



## ClieOS

monsieurfromag3 said:


> Who’s up for a cuppa?
> A “portable Tone2 Pro” incoming.


There is almost no actual info from the page.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> There is almost no actual info from the page.


True. The newsletter states:
“This portable amplifier features the high-performance ESS ES9281AC Pro DAC, as well as LDAC and aptX HD bluetooth audio via the Qualcomm QCC5125 chip.”
It also states:
 “The ‘Tea’ DAC is thinner than an iPhone 13, but has a slight bump to accommodate the 3.5mm headphone jack, and the weight of this audio marvel is just 74 grams.”
Launch is slated for October 28. The one thing the Tea doesn’t have is balanced output.


----------



## ClieOS

monsieurfromag3 said:


> True. The newsletter states:
> “This portable amplifier features the high-performance ESS ES9281AC Pro DAC, as well as LDAC and aptX HD bluetooth audio via the Qualcomm QCC5125 chip.”
> It also states:
> “The ‘Tea’ DAC is thinner than an iPhone 13, but has a slight bump to accommodate the 3.5mm headphone jack, and the weight of this audio marvel is just 74 grams.”
> Launch is slated for October 28. The one thing the Tea doesn’t have is balanced output.



That seems to be describing more like a Bluetooth DAC/amp, not a Bluetooth headphone adapter. Guess we will know more in a month.


----------



## Gee Simpson

Patiently waiting for the updated BTR5. They said it would be released in September....not long left!


----------



## Ynot1

I read a post from a chord mojo owner who wants a bluetooth transport to bypass expensive polly. I think m0 and m5 may offer bluetooth transport. So why don't newer bluetooth receivers allow people to add bluetooth via usb to their dac/amp. I think I asked this before but I can't recall where. But I can't be the only person thinking this can be done and is very much wanted.


----------



## ClieOS (Oct 5, 2021)

Ynot1 said:


> I read a post from a chord mojo owner who wants a bluetooth transport to bypass expensive polly. I think m0 and m5 may offer bluetooth transport. So why don't newer bluetooth receivers allow people to add bluetooth via usb to their dac/amp. I think I asked this before but I can't recall where. But I can't be the only person thinking this can be done and is very much wanted.



Yes, you are not the only person who think this can be done - mainly because you are also not the only person who don't understand the complexity behind it. It is not a 1 + 1 = 2 kind of implementation. Far from it.

Here is the reply I posted for a similar questions regarding iFi GO Blue, and the answer applied to other BT headphones adapter as well, so here it is:



ClieOS said:


> Long story short, some DAP can receive BT signal then output digitally over Type-C to an external DAC/amp because: (1) they have a powerful enough SoC to handle the process and (2) they have a complex enough OS (*usually some simplified Linux variations)  to do the job.
> 
> Given GO Blu, and in fact most BT headphones adapter, have neither (1) nor (2), it is only natural that they can't output digital signal over Type-C or whatever USB port they have. Therefore it really isn't much of any missed opportunity but rather you are asking the wrong device to do an impossible task. If a manufacturer want to design a BT headphones adapter with USB output with all the required hardware, they might as well just make a small DAP instead since it is only a screen and an internal memory storage away from one. Then again, DAP and BT headphone adapter are two different market all together and not every company want to be in both at the same time.


----------



## gordec

Does UP5 have a pretty clean background? I'm debating between UP5 and the new Ifi Go Blu, but it sounds like the Go Blu is pretty noisy with sensitive IEMs.


----------



## iFi audio

ClieOS said:


> Long story short, some DAP can receive BT signal then output digitally over Type-C to an external DAC/amp because: (1) they have a powerful enough SoC to handle the process and (2) they have a complex enough OS (*usually some simplified Linux variations)  to do the job.
> 
> Given GO Blu, and in fact most BT headphones adapter, have neither (1) nor (2), it is only natural that they can't output digital signal over Type-C or whatever USB port they have. Therefore it really isn't much of any missed opportunity but rather you are asking the wrong device to do an impossible task. If a manufacturer want to design a BT headphones adapter with USB output with all the required hardware, they might as well just make a small DAP instead since it is only a screen and an internal memory storage away from one. Then again, DAP and BT headphone adapter are two different market all together and not every company want to be in both at the same time.



Those are words of wisdom. I'd have to ask at our R&D whether GO blu could in theory process data incoming via BT and send it over via USB elsewhere to thus act as a BT transmitter for other devices. But even if that's possible, using a wireless DAC/amp such as GO blu like so... kinda defeats its core purpose. 



gordec said:


> Does UP5 have a pretty clean background? I'm debating between UP5 and the new Ifi Go Blu, but it sounds like the Go Blu is pretty noisy with sensitive IEMs.



With many it will work without issues, but those really sensitive might pick up background hiss.


----------



## Hanesu

gordec said:


> Does UP5 have a pretty clean background? I'm debating between UP5 and the new Ifi Go Blu, but it sounds like the Go Blu is pretty noisy with sensitive IEMs.


UP5 is super clean from my experience. No hiss even with quite sensitive IEMs.


----------



## Ynot1 (Oct 7, 2021)

Missed opportunity in my humble opinion not to pursue bluetooth transport. There are so many dac amps in the world, it's a pity not one bluetooth receiver would transport, just saying.

One more dap.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/ap80-hidizs-next-portable-hi-res-music-player.878141/post-15426392

Tell you the truth, I would not want a bluetooth receiver that can transport if it has to cost more than the dap.
I hate to remind you manufacturers of great audio gear, this is a very competitive market space.

Another dap:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/hib...ifi-digital-audio-player.943808/post-16147671

I have had this question a long time about double amping being undesirable. However if analog out is the only way to transport to another amp to get more power, at what volume level would produce the least amount of negative alterations into the output? Most amps behave undesirably at high volumes, but high volumes give you high voltage or signal levels. And when the amp is driving high output impedance there is very little current draw and therefore the amp is not breaking any sweat. My thinking is just used a high volume setting. But optimally a lower volume setting may make the host operate at a cleaner level. I could avoid all of this thinking if they just added the bluetooth transport.


----------



## ClieOS (Oct 7, 2021)

Ynot1 said:


> Missed opportunity in my humble opinion not to pursue bluetooth transport. There are so many dac amps in the world, it's a pity not one bluetooth receiver would transport, just saying.
> 
> One more dap.
> 
> ...



I think you have some very odd opinion regarding BT transport

As said before, making a BT transport is almost as complex and expensive as making a DAP, sharing most of the same internal component as well as software. To ask a manufacture to make a BT transport is about the same as asking them to make a DAP without screen and internal storage. So why won't them just make a DAP with BT transport capability (and in fact that's precisely what they choose to do)? That way they can sold the same device for multi functionality instead as an one-trick pony.

As far as my opinion goes, those DAP you pointed out are exactly the kind of BT transport you are looking for if you used them that way. Removing the screen and internal storage will not have any major impact of cost (*we are talking maybe $20~30 less per unit, could be even less), since most of the cost will be on the SoC and the firmware development.

On the other hand, I think most people who ends up using BT with higher end headphone are well aware about the shortcoming of BT impact of SQ,. Those people choose BT because they want the convenient and simplicity of having a very small device that can pair of a smartphone and willing to sacrifice some level SQ and output power in the process. An BT transport connect to a a portable DAC/amp in many way just defeat the idea of convenient and simplicity in the first place. For those who are willing to carry a full sized portable DAC/amp, we already have portable DAC/amp that has BT function built-in. I will argue that adding a small DAP with BT transport functionality to a portable DAC/amp will not actually impact most of those people willingness to carry a large stack of device on-the-go. So essentially a complex-to-build, BT transport only device is just a very niche product that don't quite fit into the market. It is an easy decision for the manufacturer - for about the same price, would you want to buy a small DAP with BT transport capability or just a BT transport? What do you think will be an easier product to sell? How would a manufacturer explain to its customer that the BT transport they made has almost all the hardware and software of a DAP, but they decided not to include a screen and internal storage to make it a fully capable DAP, but instead believe it is better off as a BT only transport?


----------



## rkw

Ynot1 said:


> Missed opportunity in my humble opinion not to pursue bluetooth transport. There are so many dac amps in the world, it's a pity not one bluetooth receiver would transport, just saying.


I just can't imagine many people wanting a portable bluetooth receiver to carry around and plug into different DACs. No manufacturer wants to build it because there is no market demand.


----------



## iFi audio (Oct 8, 2021)

ClieOS said:


> I think you have some very odd opinion regarding BT transport
> 
> As said before, making a BT transport is almost as complex and expensive as making a DAP, sharing most of the same internal component as well as software. To ask a manufacture to make a BT transport is about the same as asking them to make a DAP without screen and internal storage. So why won't them just make a DAP with BT transport capability (and in fact that's precisely what they choose to do)? That way they can sold the same device for multi functionality instead as an one-trick pony.
> 
> ...



I enjoy a lot your recent comments about BT. And yes, making a BT receiver and transport is a fair bit different than separating these utilities. 

Our recently released GO blu DAC/amp is a BT receiver. This product used as a transmitter for yet another device (...if it could be one in the first place) would then have its core functionalities (a DAC and amp) defeated and that's something very few people would be interested in, I think. At the end of the day, as a manufacturer we design products accordingly to their primary usage scenarios. Just my 0.02


----------



## Ynot1

I think you are missing the point. In this connected economy all you have to do is get the guy who worked on the project and hire him or her.  And then make them spill the beans so that you can offset the cost of R&D. Who doesn't want to be successful when everybody is busy looking the other way for their own priorities. Ok that was me just kidding, but soc and software are not that costly once somebody has made it work. The trick is to keep the secrets from being copied and pasted into a new product. Just look at the daps that I mentioned. I think they all use the ingenx1000 platform. But please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Ynot1 (Oct 8, 2021)

rkw said:


> I just can't imagine many people wanting a portable bluetooth receiver to carry around and plug into different DACs. No manufacturer wants to build it because there is no market demand.


Based on the number of post you've made you clearly were not born yesterday. But I agree to politely disagree.

I know I was suppose to combine this with my previous post, but I haven't figured that out yet.


----------



## ClieOS

If the success of the product (*BT Transport) has to rely on wishing that no one else will want to copy an easily copied design (*of which compatible functionality has already been established by other devices *DAP*) and wishing somehow its nicheness of functionality will defy the market and make it sell more than it should - then yes, you have a winner there. Now you just need to wish for one manufacturer to believe in you as well and it will be golden.


----------



## Mouseman

But...*one *buyer will certainly offset the R&D (copying and industrial espionage) and production costs, right?


----------



## ClieOS

Impression on iFi GO Blu added


----------



## waynes world

ClieOS said:


> Impression on iFi GO Blu added



Good stuff, thanks. That lower BT range would drive me nuts. Also it's pretty expensive given the competition. I'm still happy with the ES100 and BTR3K, although the ES100 BT range is not good. Your recommendation of the BTR3K was a good one - it must still be one of the better values out there.


----------



## Gee Simpson

Gee Simpson said:


> Now the BTR5 is back available in the UK (not sure if this is the new revised version or not), I'm choosing between two options.
> 
> Fiio BTR5 vs Qudelix 5K? I'll be using either via balanced, and I'm not bothered about EQ abilities.



Quoting myself here but I went for the Qudelix 5K in the end.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Gee Simpson said:


> Quoting myself here but I went for the Qudelix 5K in the end.


Good man!


----------



## DeJaVu

Gee Simpson said:


> Quoting myself here but I went for the Qudelix 5K in the end.


Great choice. Hopefully the rest of the bunch will understand soon how important software is.


----------



## ClieOS

DeJaVu said:


> Great choice. Hopefully the rest of the bunch will understand soon how important software is.



Don't think they are being ignorance of how important app is, but they simply don't have the expertise to match that of Qudelix. Software engineer is one of the most demanded job in China for the last few years, and generally speaking the mobile gaming and software companies are much more willing to pay a lot more money for an experienced software engineer than an audiophiles / hardware company. I was once told by a CEO of a hardware company that head hunting companies has poached his software engineers and offered salary than was higher than the CEO himself. He was resolved to hire young and inexperienced software engineer every year and only to see most of them got poached away in a year or two.


----------



## ClieOS

Signal strength test add to 2nd post.


----------



## waynes world

ClieOS said:


> Signal strength test add to 2nd post.



Interesting! And "ouch" for one of those tested (not mentioning any names).


----------



## Verificateur

Wow, what a gem of a thread. Thank you for all your efforts @ClieOS ! 🙌

A quick question — I just got a Qudelix 5K but all my cables are 4.4mm balanced… could anyone suggest any quality/reliable adapters to go from 4.4 to 2.5 which wouldn’t impact SQ? Or is it a bad idea to use an adapter?


----------



## Mouseman

Verificateur said:


> Wow, what a gem of a thread. Thank you for all your efforts @ClieOS ! 🙌
> 
> A quick question — I just got a Qudelix 5K but all my cables are 4.4mm balanced… could anyone suggest any quality/reliable adapters to go from 4.4 to 2.5 which wouldn’t impact SQ? Or is it a bad idea to use an adapter?


The ddHifi ones are great. The SQ won't be impacted. Be careful with cheap (Ali) ones with cables - I've had bad luck with a few that looked good but had internal/wiring issues. Fiio also has a good one with a braided cable.


----------



## ClieOS

Verificateur said:


> Wow, what a gem of a thread. Thank you for all your efforts @ClieOS ! 🙌
> 
> A quick question — I just got a Qudelix 5K but all my cables are 4.4mm balanced… could anyone suggest any quality/reliable adapters to go from 4.4 to 2.5 which wouldn’t impact SQ? Or is it a bad idea to use an adapter?



For a really compacted setup, I'll recommend the 4.4-to-2.5 adapter by ddHiFi. For use with BT adapter however, I tend to prefer a cable style adapter sometime.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

ClieOS said:


> For a really compacted setup, I'll recommend the 4.4-to-2.5 adapter by ddHiFi. For use with BT adapter however, I tend to prefer a cable style adapter sometime.


I thought the ddHifi adapters measured bad - you measured high output impedance on some of them. Maybe not all or have they improved with new models?


----------



## ClieOS

monsieurfromag3 said:


> I thought the ddHifi adapters measured bad - you measured high output impedance on some of them. Maybe not all or have they improved with new models?



I am talking about this, are we on the same thing? I don't recall measure any of ddHiFi's adapter before.







p/s: Just tried to measure it via my BK Precision BK2712 multimeter, the pins in the adapter are averaging 0.03~0.05 ohm.


----------



## Verificateur

Thank you for the recommendation.
Is this the correct adapter (4.4 to 2.5)?

https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/623555.html

Just want to confirm if it’s recommended and isn’t measured badly, in case you happen to know. @ClieOS


----------



## ClieOS (Oct 29, 2021)

Verificateur said:


> Thank you for the recommendation.
> Is this the correct adapter (4.4 to 2.5)?
> 
> https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/623555.html
> ...


That in your link is the new version with the metal housing. Mine are mostly the original version with transparent housing. I don't see why the new one will be worst or better than the new one as long as the internal is sufficiently similar.


----------



## Gee Simpson

Are 2.5mm cables reliable? I ordered one, didn't know you could buy a 4.4mm to 2.5mm adapter. I didn't have any 4.4mm cables though, just went with 2.5mm.


----------



## ClieOS

Gee Simpson said:


> Are 2.5mm cables reliable? I ordered one, didn't know you could buy a 4.4mm to 2.5mm adapter. I didn't have any 4.4mm cables though, just went with 2.5mm.


Treat it with care and I don't see why it won't last. I have been using 2.5mm cable for almost a decade now and none of them fails me.


----------



## Gee Simpson

ClieOS said:


> Treat it with care and I don't see why it won't last. I have been using 2.5mm cable for almost a decade now and none of them fails me.


Thanks. Just arrived today and my Qudelix 5k arrived yesterday even though it was expected by 4th November which is great.


----------



## ClieOS

UGREEN CM402 added to the list.


----------



## Caithang

ClieOS said:


> UGREEN CM402 được thêm vào danh sách.


Waiting for your review
Thanks


----------



## ClieOS

Caithang said:


> Waiting for your review
> Thanks



Don't think I'll be getting this one.


----------



## Zyndikate

ClieOS said:


> Treat it with care and I don't see why it won't last. I have been using 2.5mm cable for almost a decade now and none of them fails me.


Any recommendations for decent cable adapters? I have some of ddhifi's adapters, but it didn't seem like they carried a *cable* adapter for 4.4 -> 2.5.


----------



## ClieOS

Zyndikate said:


> Any recommendations for decent cable adapters? I have some of ddhifi's adapters, but it didn't seem like they carried a *cable* adapter for 4.4 -> 2.5.



They most certainly do.


----------



## holsen

Zyndikate said:


> Any recommendations for decent cable adapters? I have some of ddhifi's adapters, but it didn't seem like they carried a *cable* adapter for 4.4 -> 2.5.


Do you mean 4.4 M to 2.5 F  or 4.4 F to 2.5 M   DD makes a really good compact 4.4 M to 2.5 F
For the other, I had Xinhs make me one and they now sell them.


----------



## Zyndikate

ClieOS said:


> They most certainly do.


What about for cable style adapters? I thought you said you preferred them sometimes with BT adapters.



holsen said:


> Do you mean 4.4 M to 2.5 F  or 4.4 F to 2.5 M   DD makes a really good compact 4.4 M to 2.5 F
> For the other, I had Xinhs make me one and they now sell them.


I do have ddhifi's 4.4F 2.5M adapter (DJ44B). I was mainly asking about decent cable-style adapter options were available.
That said, if you have a link to the Xinhs model, that'd be nice to take a look at as well.


----------



## ClieOS

Zyndikate said:


> What about for cable style adapters? I thought you said you preferred them sometimes with BT adapters.
> 
> 
> I do have ddhifi's 4.4F 2.5M adapter (DJ44B). I was mainly asking about decent cable-style adapter options were available.
> That said, if you have a link to the Xinhs model, that'd be nice to take a look at as well.



There are quite a few maker of cable style adapter. Mine was actually made by VE.


----------



## Zyndikate

ClieOS said:


> There are quite a few maker of cable style adapter. Mine was actually made by VE.


Thanks for the link. It's kind of hard to see the cable from the images - what's the material like?


----------



## ClieOS

Zyndikate said:


> Thanks for the link. It's kind of hard to see the cable from the images - what's the material like?



The build quality is good. Never paid attention to what material it is in though.


----------



## kgs51

I am trying to decide between the BTR5 2021 edition and the ifi audio go blu. Which device would you recommend.


----------



## marekm

Sound - Go Blu
Build, App and BT range - BTR5


----------



## kgs51

Would you still consider the sound quality of the btr5 good.


----------



## marekm

Yes, but I still prefer Go Blu sound.

Some say BTR5 sounds digital, while Go Blue analog. Not precise obviously, but yes Go Blu sound is more pleasing, IMHO


----------



## kgs51

Thank you for your reply


----------



## Gee Simpson

Qudelix 5K 😊


----------



## ClieOS

kgs51 said:


> I am trying to decide between the BTR5 2021 edition and the ifi audio go blu. Which device would you recommend.


If you can look pass the shortcomings of Go Blu, then it is an excellent choice as far as SQ goes. The key is to prioritize what is the most important to you, beyond SQ.


----------



## iFi audio

marekm said:


> Some say BTR5 sounds digital, while Go Blue analog. Not precise obviously, but yes Go Blu sound is more pleasing, IMHO


Yes, 'analog' sound that's free from any digital tint is our sound indeed. Thanks


----------



## Echalon

Please could someone confirm whether or not the BTR3K’s eq applies to streamed content such as YouTube, or just to local files?


----------



## rkw

Echalon said:


> Please could someone confirm whether or not the BTR3K’s eq applies to streamed content such as YouTube, or just to local files?


The BTR3K itself doesn't have eq capability. Eq would have to be applied externally by the player app or phone's audio system.


----------



## Echalon

rkw said:


> The BTR3K itself doesn't have eq capability. Eq would have to be applied externally by the player app or phone's audio system.


Thank you!

I saw that the app offered an eq and hoped it would apply to everything played through the BTR3K, as with the Qudelix 5k. I’m not so sure I’ll get it, as I was really hoping for a way to eq YouTube and Amazon music. Really appreciate your help!


----------



## ClieOS

rkw said:


> The BTR3K itself doesn't have eq capability. Eq would have to be applied externally by the player app or phone's audio system.



Not entirely true.

When your use LDAC on BTR3K, then the onboard EQ is disabled as the DSP function on the Bluetooth SoC inside BTR3K doesn't have enough processing power to both decode and EQ LDAC at the same time. But if you use any other Bluetooth codec besides LDAC (*selectable in the app), the onboard EQ function can be activated via app on BTR3K and it will apply to all sound streaming to BTR3K, regardless on  whether it is music, games, youtube, etc. It will also remain active after restart until it is disabled via app. So only when you are using LDAC, then you need to use external EQ system either on your smartphone or player app.


----------



## Echalon

ClieOS said:


> Not entirely true.


That should work perfectly for what I had in mind, thank you so much for the expanded answer!


----------



## rkw

ClieOS said:


> Not entirely true.
> 
> When your use LDAC on BTR3K, then the onboard EQ is disabled as the DSP function on the Bluetooth SoC inside BTR3K doesn't have enough processing power to both decode and EQ LDAC at the same time. But if you use any other Bluetooth codec besides LDAC (*selectable in the app), the onboard EQ function can be activated via app on BTR3K and it will apply to all sound streaming to BTR3K, regardless on  whether it is music, games, youtube, etc. It will also remain active after restart until it is disabled via app. So only when you are using LDAC, then you need to use external EQ system either on your smartphone or player app.


Thanks for the correction. It's odd that FiiO's BTR3K webpage doesn't even say that it has EQ capability, except buried deep in the FAQ where it discusses EQ not working under LDAC.
https://www.fiio.com/btr3k


----------



## Dobrescu George

While I did review many Bluetooth DAC/AMP Receivers in the past, none has ever been this small, so today we feature a full written review on the world's smallest, tiniest, most diminutive DAC/AMP/Bluetooth Receiver, the H2 from Hidizs ~ 

Comparisons with two other mini sized Bluetooth DACs from the same range included in the review, along with my personal impressions on the sound and usability of it 

https://www.audiophile-heaven.com/2021/11/hidizs-h2-bluetooth-amp-smallest-receiver-out-there.html


----------



## Ynot1 (Dec 7, 2021)

Technically you can eq over LDAC if you post process your audio files using apps that can convert audio file formats. But obviously it's a bit of work.
Thankfully though SanDisk makes humungous microsd cards to store all of the variations your heart desires.

Mpow bluetooth tx/rx also uses the same CSR chip but does not support LDAC. It was $24 back in the day. But H2 has a nicer name with a dedicated amp section.


----------



## ClieOS

Oriolus 1795S added to the list. This one seems to be far more reasonably priced with a smaller size. But unfortunately still stuck with CSR8675.


----------



## kadinh

Is there any trick to get the Go Blu connected to a PC through USB? I downloaded the driver and it recognizes the hip dac, but nothing is displayed when the Go Blu is connected.


----------



## ClieOS

kadinh said:


> Is there any trick to get the Go Blu connected to a PC through USB? I downloaded the driver and it recognizes the hip dac, but nothing is displayed when the Go Blu is connected.



GO Blu shouldn't need any extra driver to work. It will work with the built-in USB audio driver on most OS.


----------



## RHMMMM

marekm said:


> Yes, but I still prefer Go Blu sound.
> 
> Some say BTR5 sounds digital, while Go Blue analog. Not precise obviously, but yes Go Blu sound is more pleasing, IMHO



How much better is the sound for a non-IEM user? I just ordered the BTR5 2021 per the recommendations I saw at the start of this thread and on other sites. 

Should I cancel and get the Go Blu?


----------



## ClieOS

RHMMMM said:


> How much better is the sound for a non-IEM user? I just ordered the BTR5 2021 per the recommendations I saw at the start of this thread and on other sites.
> 
> Should I cancel and get the Go Blu?


You should also consider what you will use besides SQ. BTR5 will offer a better USB DAC function and Bluetooth range, plus an usable shirt clip.


----------



## RHMMMM

ClieOS said:


> You should also consider what you will use besides SQ. BTR5 will offer a better USB DAC function and Bluetooth range, plus an usable shirt clip.



I ordered both and will compare and report back. Me, without ever using one of these, would say that the SQ is most important. I have never used one of these devices, so I may have a different opinion after trying them both!


----------



## XmarX

Any idea on the Hip DAC 2 from ifi in comparison with the ifi Go Blu in terms of SQ? 
Ifi Go Blu is the current SQ champion, right?


----------



## ClieOS

XmarX said:


> Any idea on the Hip DAC 2 from ifi in comparison with the ifi Go Blu in terms of SQ?
> Ifi Go Blu is the current SQ champion, right?



SQ champion in what context? If we are talking only about BT adapter, then yes, Go Blu is one of the best sounding BT adapter in the market right now. However, Hip Dac 2 really isn't a BT adapter but more of an slim USB DAC/amp. These two devices are really not designed for the same audience - Go Blu is for the people that mostly value ultra-portability and wireless convivence, where Hip Dac 2 is for people who are willing to go for the wired route for more power.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

XmarX said:


> Any idea on the Hip DAC 2 from ifi in comparison with the ifi Go Blu in terms of SQ?
> Ifi Go Blu is the current SQ champion, right?


The Hip DAC 2 sounds much better than the Go Blu, it’s much better controlled.


----------



## XmarX

ClieOS said:


> SQ champion in what context? If we are talking only about BT adapter, then yes, Go Blu is one of the best sounding BT adapter in the market right now. However, Hip Dac 2 really isn't a BT adapter but more of an slim USB DAC/amp. These two devices are really not designed for the same audience - Go Blu is for the people that mostly value ultra-portability and wireless convivence, where Hip Dac 2 is for people who are willing to go for the wired route for more power.


Sorry, I should have been more specific! I was talking about Bluetooth.

On the ifi website, it is said that the Hip DAC 2 have ~8 hrs of battery life. But the size is big.


monsieurfromag3 said:


> The Hip DAC 2 sounds much better than the Go Blu, it’s much better controlled.


That's great as there is not much difference between the two in price terms.

BTW any info about Astell & Kern stuff?


----------



## ClieOS

XmarX said:


> ...
> 
> BTW any info about Astell & Kern stuff?



My impression / experience with all A&K stuffs can almost always sum up to be "overpriced + underperforming". Unless you have already tried that specific model of A&K first hand and like it, my general recommendation is that you will find grass is greener on the other side.


----------



## rocketron

I have owned 3 AK products and only kept 1.
The AK PEE51 isn’t a bad dongle at all.
I preferred it to the W2 and S2.
I had the Go blu but returned it because of the Bluetooth range and hissing.
Have these two issues been addressed now with firmware updates?

I only as ask the Go blu is on sale at a discount at one dealer.
I quite liked the sound.


----------



## ClieOS

rocketron said:


> ...
> I had the Go blu but returned it because of the Bluetooth range and hissing.
> Have these two issues been addressed now with firmware updates?


Not really.


----------



## rocketron

ClieOS said:


> Not really.


Thank you.
The IFI Go blu is on sale at Richer sounds.
£149 down from £199.
Out of stock but can be bought though there phone sales line.

I shall try one again.👍


----------



## rkw

rocketron said:


> I shall try one again.👍


Now I'm confused. If your complaints from the first time haven't been addressed, why would it be acceptable the second time?


----------



## rocketron

rkw said:


> Now I'm confused. If your complaints from the first time haven't been addressed, why would it be acceptable the second time?


Because I liked the sound.
I will only use it S|E this time so will have less hiss.


----------



## XmarX

rocketron said:


> Thank you.
> The IFI Go blu is on sale at Richer sounds.
> £149 down from £199.
> Out of stock but can be bought though there phone sales line.
> ...


Please report back if you are successful as I'm from the UK too (east midlands).


----------



## rocketron

XmarX said:


> Please report back if you are successful as I'm from the UK too (east midlands).


Ordered yesterday though there phones sales.


----------



## sh4dow

First of all, thanks a ton for this thread! Having recently bought my second mobile device that doesn't have a headphone jack, it's become too much of an annoyance to ignore. And I want to be able to use my headphones while charging...

Something that I think would be wonderful for the first posts is sorting both lists by how much you would recommend them.
Also, based on my Google searches, it might be worthwhile to refer to the "Radsone ES100" as "EarStudio ES100" (or at least "Radsone EarStudio ES100" consistently).


----------



## ClieOS

sh4dow said:


> First of all, thanks a ton for this thread! Having recently bought my second mobile device that doesn't have a headphone jack, it's become too much of an annoyance to ignore. And I want to be able to use my headphones while charging...
> 
> Something that I think would be wonderful for the first posts is sorting both lists by how much you would recommend them.
> Also, based on my Google searches, it might be worthwhile to refer to the "Radsone ES100" as "EarStudio ES100" (or at least "Radsone EarStudio ES100" consistently).



In the past, I had ranked IEM, earbuds and portable amp, etc in list. The common problem is people just read the list itself and ignore all the detail in between. My conclusion is, never makes any multi-item review/impression too easy to read because in the long run easy becomes lazy. Those who spent time reading through often is the one benefited the most.


----------



## RHMMMM

RHMMMM said:


> I ordered both and will compare and report back. Me, without ever using one of these, would say that the SQ is most important. I have never used one of these devices, so I may have a different opinion after trying them both!



Reporting back after a week and a half with both the BTR5 2021 and Go Blu. I received both on the same day and by far my favorite has been the Go Blu. For me, sound quality and simplicity are at the top of the list and while the BTR5 has a lot of great features and nice build quality, I found myself gravitating much more towards the Go Blu for the volume wheel integration with the native iPhone volume as well as the more overall pleasing sound. My primary use case for this is just casual listening around the house or on long walks outside. 

I initially had some issues with using the Go Blu with and my iPhone 13 Pro Max with an OTG cable but upgrading the firmware to the latest from iFi solved that issue. I was able to accomplish this 100% from my iPhone using the iFi GAIA app and downloading the updated firmware and unzipping it on the phone.


----------



## rocketron

XmarX said:


> Please report back if you are successful as I'm from the UK too (east midlands).


Received the Go blu this morning and very happy with it.
I must of had a Friday afternoon unit with the first one.
Shall post some pictures tomorrow.


----------



## ballog (Jan 8, 2022)

RHMMMM said:


> Reporting back after a week and a half with both the BTR5 2021 and Go Blu. I received both on the same day and by far my favorite has been the Go Blu. For me, sound quality and simplicity are at the top of the list and while the BTR5 has a lot of great features and nice build quality, I found myself gravitating much more towards the Go Blu for the volume wheel integration with the native iPhone volume as well as the more overall pleasing sound. My primary use case for this is just casual listening around the house or on long walks outside.
> 
> I initially had some issues with using the Go Blu with and my iPhone 13 Pro Max with an OTG cable but upgrading the firmware to the latest from iFi solved that issue. I was able to accomplish this 100% from my iPhone using the iFi GAIA app and downloading the updated firmware and unzipping it on the phone.


@RHMMMM  I have the original BTR5 which is the only bluetooth dac/amp available in my country (price is around $100). Do you consider the SQ of the Go Blu over the BTR5 (assuming its almost the same sq as the 2021 model) would justify the price jump (around $250 import for me).


----------



## RHMMMM

ballog said:


> @RHMMMM  I have the original BTR5 which is the only bluetooth dac/amp available in my country at around $100. Do you consider the SQ of the Go Blu over the BTR5 (assuming its almost the same sq as the 2021 model) would justify the price jump (around $250 import for me).



It’s very subjective. The BTR5 had great sound - it was very clear, clean and detailed but a little too neutral for my taste. I was able to make the BTR5 sound more pleasing by adding a slight custom EQ. Since you already have one, I would suggest simply trying that and putting any additional $ towards maybe another new different DAC or something else you’ve been wanting to try.


----------



## marekm

Improvement in SQ is indeed subjective, but loss of BT range (if you switch to Go Blu) is a fact.

I want my Qudelix 5K back


----------



## ClieOS

Go Blu is an excellent sounding BT adapter. But for $200, I really expect it to be near perfect functionary wise instead of having a weak BT range and no case / shirt clip. It would have a much better value if it was priced under $150 IMO.


----------



## rocketron

That is exactly my view as well.
I just managed to update the software from my iPhone.
I can use it as a wired dac/amp as well.

Talking of Bluetooth range this 2nd unit I have is far far better than my first one.
I can leave my phone 40-50 feet away and have no drop outs of signal.

The first unit would cut even if you had your phone in one pocket and Go blu in the other.
This one no problems at all.
Very happy with it.
Like I said a few days ago it’s £149 at Richer sounds and at that price point it’s well worth it.
Good job IFI.

This are fantastic times for small dongle type things.
You can get really good sound from things like the Abigail dongle right up to the W2. 
The Go Blu is right near the top sound wise if you like a warmer smooth sound signature.
It’s also powerful.

Just my 2cents.


----------



## rocketron

Sorry said I would take some pictures.


----------



## ClieOS (Jan 6, 2022)

rocketron said:


> ...
> 
> Talking of Bluetooth range this 2nd unit I have is far far better than my first one.
> I can leave my phone 40-50 feet away and have no drop outs of signal.
> ...



Make me wonder whether they have done some secret hardware reversion. Not gonna be fair to the early adopters if that's the case.

p/s: just saw a December firmware - trying to update now and will report back on whether it improve BT range or not.
pp/s: Updated to the new v3.05 firmware, RSSI test shows that BT range remains as weak as before.


----------



## rocketron

ClieOS said:


> Make me wonder whether they have done some secret hardware reversion. Not gonna be fair to the early adopters if that's the case.
> 
> p/s: just saw a December firmware - trying to update now and will report back on whether it improve BT range or not.
> pp/s: Updated to the new v3.05 firmware, RSSI test shows that BT range remains as weak as before.


I don’t know if there has been a hardware reversion or not?

I personally believe my first unit was faulty, as the difference between the two is like night and day.
I can hold a phone conversation in rooms upstairs in my house while the phone is downstairs.
This has created another problem as I keep forgetting we’re the phone is.😁

Could you not contact IFI support and give them your units serial No and ask?
Or maybe try another unit in a dealers show room?


My unit works perfectly and is in line with what I personally believe a BT dongle thing is capable of doing.
I’m no expert on BT or anything.

I’m also on the latest update.
Maybe try that rest button and update again?

Hope you get it sorted as there a great little unit.


----------



## ClieOS

rocketron said:


> I don’t know if there has been a hardware reversion or not?
> 
> I personally believe my first unit was faulty, as the difference between the two is like night and day.
> I can hold a phone conversation in rooms upstairs in my house while the phone is downstairs.
> ...


What you had experienced on your first unit is pretty much the same as many (including me)  have reported over at the main GO Blu thread so I don't think it is a faulty unit. iFi has yet to issue any real response / fix over this except acknowledging they know about it and will look into it. To be frank, I don't have high hope on this.


----------



## rocketron

ClieOS said:


> What you had experienced on your first unit is pretty much the same as many (including me)  have reported over at the main GO Blu thread so I don't think it is a faulty unit. iFi has yet to issue any real response / fix over this except acknowledging they know about it and will look into it. To be frank, I don't have high hope on this.


Oh I’m sorry too hear that.
I do hope then that IFI can do something about it.

My first unit was so bad I sent it back.
The only other unit I have sent back because it was useless was the AK Alpha.

Maybe you could exchange yours?

I do think there a good dac/amp Bluetooth dongle.
I’m walking around my house running a pair of Grado HF3 with a smile on my face.

I may look into having a leather case made for it ?


----------



## iFi audio

ClieOS said:


> iFi has yet to issue any real response / fix over this except acknowledging they know about it and will look into it.



Thanks for your feedback and just to let everyone know, we pass on any info here on Head-fi.org that we get from our HQ and R&D. The Go blu subject isn't closed and as soon as we have any news, we'll gladly share it. Thanks!


----------



## marekm

iFi audio said:


> The Go blu subject isn't closed and as soon as we have any news, we'll gladly share it. Thanks!



So give us a straight answer. Has IFI introduced any (undisclosed) hardware changes to the Go Blu since its official launch?


----------



## RHMMMM

I am able to leave my phone in the middle of my 1000 sq ft apartment in LA (I have fairly bad 2.4ghz pollution) and have no BT dropouts walking around my house with the Go Blu. If I move my phone to one end of the apartment and go to the other with the Blu, I do indeed get dropouts. I did not test the BTR5 range before I sent it back.


----------



## ClieOS

RHMMMM said:


> I am able to leave my phone in the middle of my 1000 sq ft apartment in LA (I have fairly bad 2.4ghz pollution) and have no BT dropouts walking around my house with the Go Blu. If I move my phone to one end of the apartment and go to the other with the Blu, I do indeed get dropouts. I did not test the BTR5 range before I sent it back.


The best way to see an accurate BT signal strength is to download a BT signal testing app (many are free to use / try) onto your smartphone. If you do, report back the RSSI value to us on various distance.


----------



## tonedeafmelomaniac

Hi everyone! Does go blu support external mic for phone calls?


----------



## ClieOS

tonedeafmelomaniac said:


> Hi everyone! Does go blu support external mic for phone calls?


No.


----------



## tonedeafmelomaniac

ClieOS said:


> No.


Thanks!
So to answer a call l should take it from my pocket and put closer to mouth? Great usability


----------



## rocketron

tonedeafmelomaniac said:


> Thanks!
> So to answer a call l should take it from my pocket and put closer to mouth? Great usability


Don’t you do that anyway with your phone?


----------



## tonedeafmelomaniac (Jan 9, 2022)

rocketron said:


> Don’t you do that anyway with your phone?


In such a situation, I don't. I press a button on my headset.


----------



## ClieOS

tonedeafmelomaniac said:


> In such a situation, I don't. I press a button on my headset.


FiiO BTR5 and Qudelix 5K both support external headset's mic. Personally, I use earphone with exchangeable cable and switch to short cable when using BT adapter, then affix the BT adapter near the shirt collar / chest area. If I have to suffer long cable, I might as well use USB dongle attach directly to the smartphone.


----------



## tonedeafmelomaniac

ClieOS said:


> FiiO BTR5 and Qudelix 5K both support external headset's mic. Personally, I use earphone with exchangeable cable and switch to short cable when using BT adapter, then affix the BT adapter near the shirt collar / chest area. If I have to suffer long cable, I might as well use USB dongle attach directly to the smartphone.


I also consider usb dongle as an option, but as far as i know not all of them support inline mic. It's not difficult for me to take any device from my pocket, it's just a matter of convenience, especially in cold rainy conditions.


----------



## Hanesu (Jan 10, 2022)

ClieOS said:


> FiiO BTR5 and Qudelix 5K both support external headset's mic. Personally, I use earphone with exchangeable cable and switch to short cable when using BT adapter, then affix the BT adapter near the shirt collar / chest area. If I have to suffer long cable, I might as well use USB dongle attach directly to the smartphone.


Just out of interest: Many seem to use a BT dongle and their IEMs to talk on the phone....don`t you think it is really difficult to talk with an IEM that creates a seal in your ears? I have tried it many times and always found it terrible not being able to hear my own voice properly while being on the phone. I ended up in _*not *_using my BT dongles for talking on the phone anymore, only TWS that either don`t create a seal (such as regular Airpods) or have a decent ambient mode (the ambient mode of the Qudelix unfortunately is far from decent in my opinion)....


----------



## iFi audio

marekm said:


> So give us a straight answer. Has IFI introduced any (undisclosed) hardware changes to the Go Blu since its official launch?



There were no silent changes as far as we're aware and whan they happen we're vocal here on HF, i.e. XMOS updates. Still, I'll ask internally.


----------



## ClieOS

Hanesu said:


> Just out of interest: Many seem to use a BT dongle and their IEMs to talk on the phone....don`t you think it is really difficult to talk with an IEM that creates a seal in your ears? I have tried it many times and always found it terrible not being able to hear my own voice properly while being on the phone. I ended up in _*not *_using my BT dongles for talking on the phone anymore, only TWS that either don`t create a seal (such as regular Airpods) or have a decent ambient mode (the ambient mode of the Qudelix unfortunately is far from decent in my opinion)....



Personally I don't get a lot of calls, so it isn't really any great inconvenience when I do have to take call with BT adapter. I don't know about the rest of the world, but at least in my country we do most of our communication via messaging app (mostly WhatsApp, WeChat, etc) instead of calling. In fact, I often got more spam call and ads call than any real call.


----------



## Hanesu

ClieOS said:


> Personally I don't get a lot of calls, so it isn't really any great inconvenience when I do have to take call with BT adapter. I don't know about the rest of the world, but at least in my country we do most of our communication via messaging app (mostly WhatsApp, WeChat, etc) instead of calling. In fact, I often got more spam call and ads call than any real call.


Right, I also don`t do "regular" phone calls often, but what about video conferences? We all do them regularly in the past two years, don`t we? I was just wondering because so many people here ask for short cables or clips to attach them to their shirt, so there must be quite a big target group for that usage scenario, right? Me, too, I thought I would be using my BT adapter for it, but again, I find it very inconvenient because of the created seal and had asked myself many times how other people deal with it....


----------



## RHMMMM

ClieOS said:


> The best way to see an accurate BT signal strength is to download a BT signal testing app (many are free to use / try) onto your smartphone. If you do, report back the RSSI value to us on various distance.



I tried two BT apps on my iPhone - both named "BLE Scanner" ...seem to be from different vendors though. 

The numbers seemed to jump around so below are the average RSSI numbers for the Go at different distances - stable connection until around 20ft away:

5ft -59
10ft -65
15ft -77
20ft -92 (audio dropouts occuring)


----------



## Shanling

Hanesu said:


> Just out of interest: Many seem to use a BT dongle and their IEMs to talk on the phone....don`t you think it is really difficult to talk with an IEM that creates a seal in your ears? I have tried it many times and always found it terrible not being able to hear my own voice properly while being on the phone. I ended up in _*not *_using my BT dongles for talking on the phone anymore, only TWS that either don`t create a seal (such as regular Airpods) or have a decent ambient mode (the ambient mode of the Qudelix unfortunately is far from decent in my opinion)....


I have exactly the same issue as you have. I can't stand having a phone call with IEMs, always have to switch to earbuds.


----------



## ClieOS

RHMMMM said:


> I tried two BT apps on my iPhone - both named "BLE Scanner" ...seem to be from different vendors though.
> 
> The numbers seemed to jump around so below are the average RSSI numbers for the Go at different distances - stable connection until around 20ft away:
> 
> ...


20ft audio dropout isn't too far off from my experience.


----------



## marekm

BT 4.0 standards


----------



## ClieOS (Jan 11, 2022)

marekm said:


> BT 4.0 standards


Actually it has nothing to do with whether it is BT4.0 or BT5.0.  BT transmitting power is defined by what class it is in. Class 1 devices' radio outputs 100mW of power (open distance up to 100m), Class 2 is 2.5mW (up to 10m), Class 3 is 1mW (1m) and Class 4 is 0.5mW (0.5m). Most BT adapters (and in fact most portable, battery powered BT devices) are Class 2. You can have a BT5.0 Class 4 devices with much shorter range than a BT4.0 Class 1 device, because their radio are on different classes of output power.


----------



## marekm

You right, however, from consumer's perspective BT capability (range / stability of connection) of Go Blu is reminiscent of old (crappy by today's standards) equipment.


----------



## Dobrescu George

I just posted a video, but it is time for another one!! Today I review FiiO BTR5 2021 in viddy, a Bluetooth DAC/AMP/Receiver with an improved sound from the original and with support for the controversial MQA format~


----------



## Sandbox2

I'm a noob but what does this portable bluetooth amp do exactly?


----------



## Hanesu (Jan 30, 2022)

Sandbox2 said:


> I'm a noob but what does this portable bluetooth amp do exactly?


Most smartphones don`t have a headphone jack anymore, so you can`t use your wired earphones with them directly.
You can plug them into such portable bluetooth dac though that then connects wirelessly with your smartphone. So you can continue to use your wired earphones.

You might ask about the advantage of such system over a true wireless earset that does not have cables at all.
Well, true wireless earphones have extremely miniaturized technology inside, including the drivers that produce the sound, a bluetooth module, batteries, an amplifier and a DAC chip (digital audio converter). That often leads to far from ideal components and not so high audio quality (at least still...might change in future).
By using a portable bluetooth amp you usually have higher quality components inside that you can pair with (if you wish a super high quality) wired earphone - and you get the best sound quality you can achieve with bluetooth. Of course a fully wired connection with your source is still the best option in terms of sound quality. But you can do that, too, with many DAC dongles, by simply adding another cable between your smartphone and the dongle. Like this, you can also listen to high res audio codecs that are not available over bluetooth.


----------



## Sandbox2

How is the Shanling UP5 different from the TempoTec Sonata E44 that I just purchased? Judging from that description, they seem to solve the same problem with the phone not having a headphone jack.


----------



## Hanesu (Jan 31, 2022)

Sandbox2 said:


> How is the Shanling UP5 different from the TempoTec Sonata E44 that I just purchased? Judging from that description, they seem to solve the same problem with the phone not having a headphone jack.


The UP5 has bluetooth (so you can also connect it wirelessly to your phone), the E44 hasn`t (works only fully wired). The UP5 has a different DAC chip, more output power, a display and three different types of output connectors (2,5/3,5/4,4 mm).


----------



## Dobrescu George

Sandbox2 said:


> I'm a noob but what does this portable bluetooth amp do exactly?



They take bluetooth signal and provide audio signal  to a pair of wired IEMs / Headphones 

Some of them can work as DACs too from your smartphone with USB cords


----------



## RHMMMM

What’s the trick to get this thing to consistently connect to an iPhone over an OTG cable? I have mine updated to the latest firmware and it’s really spotty on being able to get the USB OTG connection working right.


----------



## ClieOS (Feb 17, 2022)

RHMMMM said:


> What’s the trick to get this thing to consistently connect to an iPhone over an OTG cable? I have mine updated to the latest firmware and it’s really spotty on being able to get the USB OTG connection working right.


What exactly is 'this thing'?


----------



## RHMMMM

Sorry, the iFi Go Blu.


----------



## ClieOS

RHMMMM said:


> Sorry, the iFi Go Blu.


Don't have an iPhone, though I'll suggest you try a different OTG cable if you can.


----------



## iFi audio

RHMMMM said:


> What’s the trick to get this thing to consistently connect to an iPhone over an OTG cable? I have mine updated to the latest firmware and it’s really spotty on being able to get the USB OTG connection working right.



As per @ClieOS' suggestion, trying a different OTG cable wouldn't hurt, but let me ask whether there's any specific reason why you don't use GO blu as a wireless device?


----------



## RHMMMM (Feb 17, 2022)

iFi audio said:


> As per @ClieOS' suggestion, trying a different OTG cable wouldn't hurt, but let me ask whether there's any specific reason why you don't use GO blu as a wireless device?



I have tried two different OTG to USB-C cables with the same inconsistent result. This is in an iPhone 13 Pro Max with iOS 15.3.1 and a fresh reboot.

Digging in more, it seems that Spotify more consistently works than Qobuz or Tidal. While connected with either lightning to OTG cable, switching from Spotify to the Tidal or Qobuz apps, I actually have to power cycle the iFi device to make it play a song and then sometimes the second track in Tidal and Qobuz won’t play. 

Why use it wired? Because it flat out sounds better than Bluetooth on iOS. I have a Luxury and Precision W2 and, for me, it’s more fun to listen to the iFi Go Blu in the wired configuration than the W2 on iPhone. In comparison to the W2, it's more punchy and fun. Compared to the Go Blu in BT mode, wired mode has more detail, spaciousness, dynamics and realism.

Happy to beta test new firmware that fixes these issues. When I first got the device, before updating to the latest Dec 2021 firmware, it wouldn’t work at all wired with the iPhone. If it could more consistently work with all the streaming apps wired, that would be great.


----------



## iFi audio

RHMMMM said:


> Why use it wired? Because it flat out sounds better than Bluetooth on iOS. I have a Luxury and Precision W2 and, for me, it’s more fun to listen to the iFi Go Blu in the wired configuration than the W2 on iPhone. In comparison to the W2, it's more punchy and fun. Compared to the Go Blu in BT mode, wired mode has more detail, spaciousness, dynamics and realism.



I suspected that this is the reason, but thanks for explaining nonetheless and it's great to read that you like GO blu wired. In the meantime I've asked internally about what might be the reason for this issue and whether it's in any way realted to GO blu's firmware, thanks!


----------



## Safeinthemountains

Hello,
I've been reading some threads here since a long time ago, but this is the first time I post...

I've been using The Radsone Earstudio ES100 Mk1 & Mk2, from February 2019 until now. In terms of SQ, functionnalites, specs, battery life, it was ticking all the boxes for me.
The Mk2 has been bought directly from Radsone in November 2020.

The reason: the Mk1 has had progressively some sort of stutter at times after starting up, then it was OK for playback, but it degraded over time, and in the end it was stopping by itself every now and then... Reset and flashing firmware did improve things at some point, but in the end it was unusable...
I thought there was a problem with my unit, so when Radsone offered me 20% discount on Mk2 (which is only a cosmetic upgrade) I accepted.
Now I am at the same stage with Mk2; stutters for a looong time at startup before having stable playback, then stops by itself, refuses to power up, and when finally I manage to power it up, the "jingle" at startup and shutdown is weird, time-stretched... 

Has anyone had the same issues ? Or am I just unfortunate ?
I can't believe in 2 years time I got to units with exactly the same problem...
And the source cannot be the cause of the problem, I used 3 smartphones 1 android DAP and 2 Hiby DAP...

And this BT DAC is still the most fuctionnal to my opinion, when it works:
Good enough (and rather transparent) SQ to my taste
Smooth and very refined App
Battery life ~11hrs in real life (Aptx HD, Vol~30dB on the App in 32ohms phones)
separate vol +/- and previous/next buttons to avoid confusion, and for fast track skipping.
(integrated clip, small size and low weight are also + but not mandatory)
The plastic aspect of the case and the placement of the mic/buttons is not ideal, but hey, you always have to make some sort of compromise...

If somebody has an idea in order to "unbrick" those two ES100, I would be really happy.
If no chance I'll look for a good candidate for replacement; >10hours battery, Aptx, AAC or LDAC codecs, and most important volume and prev/next buttons !
I've gone trough all the FR websites, and it's always to choose between the Fiio BTR line , or the Shanling UP4/5, but none has the battery life nor the interface...

Thanks in advance,


----------



## Jaysound

I'm not an audiophile and haven't looked into spec details to compare, and I haven't kept up on what's the latest. But a few years ago after hunting this forum I got the FiiO BTR5 and have never looked back. I love it. But since you say it doesn't have the battery life or interface you want, maybe that's not for you. I wish the BTR5 had a bigger display so I could read it in sunlight but I rarely need to read it. And if the battery ever runs out I have a small battery pack and 12-inch USB cable and I'm good to go for days.

The BTR5 has a new model since I got mine. I don't know what the improvements are. They gave it a new name so there must be some. Or maybe useless bells and whistles?

I use it with the Shure SE425, which is fine for me and which I learned from research is unadulterated sound (unlike, say, the SE525, which I tried and immediately returned). I only use the Shure triple-flange tips, which I found are by far the best for SQ as well as comfort and convenience (after an insane amount of research and trial-and-error, and they also have the best reviews). The only flaw is that they lose the seal on certain movements of the jaw and head but that's only if you're doing odd exercise movements. I even had a custom mold of my ear made at one point and had expensive custom IEMs made for me by a major brand and they were so horrible I threw them away. I love the triple-flange.


----------



## waynes world (Mar 22, 2022)

Safeinthemountains said:


> The reason: the Mk1 has had progressively some sort of stutter at times after starting up, then it was OK for playback, but it degraded over time, and in the end it was stopping by itself every now and then... Reset and flashing firmware did improve things at some point, but in the end it was unusable...



Been there.



> I thought there was a problem with my unit, so when Radsone offered me 20% discount on Mk2 (which is only a cosmetic upgrade) I accepted.
> Now I am at the same stage with Mk2; stutters for a looong time at startup before having stable playback, then stops by itself, refuses to power up, and when finally I manage to power it up, the "jingle" at startup and shutdown is weird, time-stretched...



Done that too!



> Has anyone had the same issues ? Or am I just unfortunate ?
> I can't believe in 2 years time I got to units with exactly the same problem...
> And the source cannot be the cause of the problem, I used 3 smartphones 1 android DAP and 2 Hiby DAP...



I'm a sucker for punishment, and I like the sound of the ES100, so I've done one better than you, and I got a 3rd ES100! (as well as a BTR3K, which I also really like)

Things were ticking along just fine until I lost my 3rd ES100 a few months ago, so now I have a Qudelix 5K (along with my BTR3K).



> And this BT DAC is still the most fuctionnal to my opinion, when it works:
> Good enough (and rather transparent) SQ to my taste
> Smooth and very refined App
> Battery life ~11hrs in real life (Aptx HD, Vol~30dB on the App in 32ohms phones)
> ...



I gave up on the idea of unbricking them, but maybe you will have better luck.

IMO, you can't go wrong with the BTR3K or the Qudelix 5K - they both sound comparably great to me, LDAC, balanced, good range (think 5K is a bit better), whereas the ES100's range was poor in comparison.
I think the battery is better on the 5K versus the BTR3K, but I'd have to check.
The 5K's advantage is LDAC EQ (if that's important to you), and a much more robust app and options.
One thing I like about the BTR3K is the un-integrated clip, so the BTR3K can be orientated as desired.

When I lose or brick my 5K and BTR3K, I might try the iFi Go Blu (_if _it ever goes on sale - shipping to Canada + exchange rates are a killer).


----------



## ClieOS

Yep, the logical upgrade from ES100 will be Qudelix 5K, given they are both designed by the same guy. It is not uncommon to see ES100 degrades after a year or so, which I suspect could be hardware related that makes it not quite as durable as we like. EarStudio also never bother to update the ES100 (both in hardware and software) since 2019 as its main engineer left the company and found Qudelix himself.


----------



## Safeinthemountains

Okay, so good to know I'm not becoming crazy; some ES100 units if not all have an issue, the are "aging" in some ways...
The bad: it seems that we all have given up trying to bring them back to life, and Radsone is just selling units and replacing them under warranty, then you just have to throw it away; I really hate the way things go. I would have paid 2x the price to get a device that would last 5-10years, in the end I paid 1.8x for two devices that lasted both 1.5 year.

Then the Qdelix 5K; I just discover it, it's already been around for some time.
Obviously not available in France, even on Amazon... Their website reminds me the one of Radsone, same style, facts, data, the performance and functionnality are there.
I would pass on the ugly, black, "brick" angled design, but why the heck do they all use "multifuctionnal button" instead of separate play/pause, and prev/next; this is really unconvenient when you have to go back by several tracks in a playlist !

At the moment i am using the Hiby R2/R3 as BT DACs, and I can easily skip tracks whenever I need to. The only issue is that it is not convenient when I have to power up/power down, compared to ES100, you need several operations to get it to connect to the phone, and it is more complicated to unconnect, plus this is quite basic; just BT reception, no options, nor EQ...
From the list at the beginning of this thread, I spotted the WH3S the BTR3K, and the UP4 that would be the closest to what I need, but they do not have direct track skipping.
It's funnny to realize that all of the "big ones" have issues; WH5 has crappy interface, BTR5 bad battery life, and UP5 a firmware full of glitches ! They all could be almost perfect mobile DAC's, but they all have flaws in their design that put them off, for me at least...

At this stage I don't know If I want to put again 100+ € in a device that could not last more that 2 yrs. it's even more frustrating when you know that what you have is doing its job almost perfectly, but just didn't last.


----------



## Dust by Monday

I’m having an interesting problem with my FiiO BTR3K…

I ordered the Lightning to USB-C cable (LT-LT1) and it was working great with my BTR3K for about 5 minutes, but I noticed the buttons on the BTR3K kept activating the Bluetooth connection and I would have to keep switching it back to USB mode, so I thought I'd just clear the Bluetooth pairing on the BTR3K.

After I cleared the Bluetooth pairing, I couldn't get the iPhone to recognize the BTR3K via USB anymore. I've reset the BTR3K multiple times to factory defaults, turned off USB charging, prioritized DAC mode and I've done everything I could to get it to work again. I even tried restarting my iPhone and also, plugging it into an iPad I have. Nothing I do will make this cable work again.

I wanted to make sure the BTR3K is working properly so I plugged it into my Mac and it works perfectly as a USB DAC, and it also works just fine over bluetooth, but when I try to use the LT-LT1 cable, the iPhone just doesn't recognize it in iOS. The iPhone is on version 14.8.1 and the iPad is on the latest iOS 15.4.1.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Safeinthemountains

Hello,

Sorry, no idea about the behaviour of the BTR3K...

In my case, I did a survey on all possible new candidates, I even tried again to re-use the two ES100 I had, but I have to admit they are ****ed ! this is a pity because even now, they still compete with the last iteration of the other brands, when they actually work...

The SQ for me will be "good enough" most of the time because, let's face it, I'll use it mainly for commuting.
The two things I need are still: quick and easy button interface, and battery life, which not a lot of people seem to care about here 
But none of the available models on the market right now has separate track skipping buttons, so I'll have to live with it...

The Qdelix 5K seems to be the logical sucessor of the ES100; same price, very good SQ, very nice app and lots of functions, settings but I don't want to renew the experience I had with Radsone, plus the design is too ugly and eveyone says the buttons are not convenient ! Come on... It is not that difficult to design a button layout that is convenient and easy to use.

BTR5K could have been a good upgrade, but the battery life is terrible (6-7 hours at most). and mixing short/long presses on +/- buttons to achieve track navigation must be really annoying in everyday use...

UP5 has good SQ, good battery life but unstable firmware, I've read it many times... So this is a no-go.

Hiby W3S was also a good, very basic and cheaper option, battery life should be good enough, but they are sold out at that time...

Then there is UP4; good battery life, simple yet ergonomic design, not a lot of functions/settings, buggy app, but if it works out of the box ? I didn't use that much the EQ on the ES100, so I can live without it. Here in France I can get it for €90 with 2-year european warranty. I just hope it will connect quickly and easily, and it will do the basics; playing music for >10 hours with a decent quality and no more hassle


----------



## monsieurfromag3 (Apr 10, 2022)

Safeinthemountains said:


> Hello,
> 
> Sorry, no idea about the behaviour of the BTR3K...
> 
> ...


Hi Florian,
It’s twice as expensive but iFi’s GO blu seems to tick all the boxes.
edit: it’s a single navigation button but seems easy to use.


----------



## holsen

Safeinthemountains said:


> Hello,
> 
> Sorry, no idea about the behaviour of the BTR3K...
> 
> ...


I've got the UP5 having upgraded from the UP2 and I must say it's a phenomenal device. I flipped back and forth btwn getting the UP4 or UP5 and believe I made the right choice. As you say, the SQ is very good both as usb dac and through BT over LDAC and the current firmware I have found to be very stable.  Battery life is outstanding and the while, I didn't miss the screen on the UP2, I really appreciate it on on the 5.  It's also, got plenty of power,  I haven't needed to put it in high gain with any of my IEMs.

For me the UP2 (and the BTR3) was the perfect size; they're both quite small and light weight so and I often use them when cycling by clipping to my Jersey and the only down side with the 5 is the added weight, which still is not an issue.
As far as app is concerned,  the Shanling Eddict Player has replaced the controller app so I don't know why @Shanling still references it on their site and their threads.  The Eddict player gave me access to functions on the UP2 the I could not access with the controller app.  
I had the M3X DAP for about a month before upgrading to the M6 21 Pro.  It was a great DAP that punched way above its weight class. The UP5 has the same chipset in it and it sounds fantastic. Just going from memory, I think the 5 sounds even better.  It has all the clarity detail and resolution, with a touch of that shanling "house sound", having a touch of warmth.
Anyway, thats my experience with it, YMMV.   I think I would have been happy with the UP4 and if the app is your holdup, try the EDDICT Player App.  It simply works and it works simply.


----------



## Luke Skywalker (Apr 10, 2022)

holsen said:


> I've got the UP5 having upgraded from the UP2 and I must say it's a phenomenal device. I flipped back and forth btwn getting the UP4 or UP5 and believe I made the right choice. As you say, the SQ is very good both as usb dac and through BT over LDAC and the current firmware I have found to be very stable.  Battery life is outstanding and the while, I didn't miss the screen on the UP2, I really appreciate it on on the 5.  It's also, got plenty of power,  I haven't needed to put it in high gain with any of my IEMs.
> 
> For me the UP2 (and the BTR3) was the perfect size; they're both quite small and light weight so and I often use them when cycling by clipping to my Jersey and the only down side with the 5 is the added weight, which still is not an issue.
> As far as app is concerned,  the Shanling Eddict Player has replaced the controller app so I don't know why @Shanling still references it on their site and their threads.  The Eddict player gave me access to functions on the UP2 the I could not access with the controller app.
> ...


Thanks for the great info, especially on the UP5!

I’m searching for a “dongle” like this and I’m  also considering the iFi Go Blue and Fiio BTR 2021, however I’m open to any similar device that gives me an audio experience as close to that of a high end DAP as possible with my iPhone 12 Pro Max

I listen to music from:

Qobuz
Tidal (MQA / Masters whenever possible)
FLACs and DSDs through Neutron iOS app
Nvidia shield -> Bluetooth (AptxHd, AAC, LDAC…)
My listening devices are:

JH Lola w/ balanced 2.5mm cable
Audeze LCD-2 (balanced 4.4 and 3.5 cables)
A collection of TWS buds
Soon to be arriving UTWS5 hooked up to Monarch Mkii
I have a HiBy FC5 but based on my limited knowledge I feel like there’s something superior out there. I also have an iFi xDSD but it’s older and rather bulky to boot.

I’d greatly appreciate any thoughts and advice! I’d like to keep it to $1,000 or less but I can stretch that if needed.  I’m open to buying multiple devices if that makes sense for these use cases.

I’d like the device I get (or one of the devices if I buy more than 1…) to work as a USB DAC as well.

 *edit* also important to me is that the device (or one of the devices) be easily 
 portable

Thanks!!!


----------



## rocketron

Ifi Go Blu ?
Chord Mojo 2 + Poly ?


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Luke Skywalker said:


> Thanks for the great info, especially on the UP5!
> 
> I’m searching for a “dongle” like this and I’m  also considering the iFi Go Blue and Fiio BTR 2021, however I’m open to any similar device that gives me an audio experience as close to that of a high end DAP as possible with my iPhone 12 Pro Max
> 
> ...


I will get flamed but I don’t care: I think the Qudelix-5K is on par with a Kann Alpha in terms of DAC, it’s less powerful of course yet just as beefy as an SR25 and more than the M3X for instance. I like the sound out of my N3Pro better, but that’s just because I favor its tuning.
On the dongle side I personally give the win to the 5K over the GO blu because it’s better controlled, very balanced and detailed, at a cheaper price.
Where iFi may win you over is with the Gryphon, BT-capable, MQA-ready (something the Qudelix is not), specced like a beast DAP. Of course it’s not in dongle format but since you mention the xDSD… I have never heard the Gryphon but thought the Hip DAC was a beast for less money than the GO blu.


----------



## Safeinthemountains

Hi, I received the UP4 yesterday, and I have already lots to say about it...

_Comment on the iFi GoBlu : I didn't consider this one because as far as i've seen, for me there is no advantage over the other models; SQ would be more than good enough, battery life is not fantastic, and the interface is like the Shanling one... and the price is far too expensive for what I call a "gadget" that will most probably have a limited lifetime._

First impressions on the UP4: out of the box it is not too big compared to the ES100, it looks qualitative but the surfaces are fragile, glass and black anodization will be prone to scratches... Personnaly I would prefer good quality plastic, especially because it should be easy to open/repair. I'm not sure to be able to open the UP4 without breaking one of the glass panels...

The plastic housing and the clip feels... not good/not bad... It could protect better the device by surrounding it. Good point is that the clip could be changed if broken, but I couldn't find any way to get a new one, or a third party one... 3D printing, someone ?
The "mode" button is badly placed; when it is attached to a jeans pocket or a belt, if you're right-handed, when you want to change volume or push on the knob, your thumb is naturally resting on the mode button, thus inhibiting the power/play button... did they try the device themselves ???

Simply put; the APP is CRAP 
Whenever I tried to set an EQ, it got disconnected, and couldn't reconnect... a pain in the A55...

The led indicator is not well placed and too tiny, I could flash at a higher frequency (6 secs between two flashes) so that you can quickly know if it is ON or not.

The good:
_startup is quick, pairing, reconnection is seamless, it worked in less than 5 secs 100% of the time 
_BT range seems really good, no stutter, no hiccup....
_SQ is "As Good As I Need"; means that I cannot see the subtle difference between various DAC's, filters and so on, but I can hear compression artifacts, loss of soudstage, noise, distortion at a certain level, V-type equalization... and for daily use, mostly on my bike into the traffic, or doing DYI at home with moderate noise around, the UP4 is up to my expectations.
Even for home use whith K701, I think it would do the job, but I have a dedicated player for that, so there is no point using lossy BT link with the mandatory codecs...

I didn't have the occasion to test the battery life, but I'm going to use it on a daily basis from now.

At this point, it is a bit too early to say, but I don't really know if this is a keeper.

The main flaw is the unique button for play FF/RW track skipping; if I'm not fast enough doing the triple-click for going backwards, it goes one step forward then pauses the music; aaaaaarghhhh, this is really annoying !!! It makes me crazy ! 
Because sometimes I want to go 4, 5, 6 tracks forward, or I simply want to change a radio station on Tunein or Vradio, and this is really hard to manage.


----------



## Safeinthemountains (Apr 12, 2022)

I looked again at the website of Qdelix; the track navigation is "less worse" on the 5K probably, as it has separate buttons and "double click" only for this function...
(on the app, you can even choose single click for previous track...)
Plus the fact that the battery life is promised as the best of its class (20hrs in 16/44 AAC and 18hrs in 16/44 LDAC in theory...)
Plus the added value of the app to customize everything.

The only downside is a big one; this 5K is the direct legacy of Radsone ES100; the design, the app, even the website is really similar... so what about durabilty, reliability and after sales ?
Has anyone had any failure / problem with their 5K over at least one year of use ?
I would like to get some feedback, before I decide to put $130 on this one...


----------



## greyforest

Safeinthemountains said:


> I looked again at the website of Qdelix; the track navigation is "less worse" on the 5K probably, as it has separate buttons and "double click" only for this function...
> (on the app, you can even choose single click for previous track...)
> Plus the fact that the battery life is promised as the best of its class (20hrs in 16/44 AAC and 18hrs in 16/44 LDAC in theory...)
> Plus the added value of the app to customize everything.
> ...


5k have some issues like button faulty after a year of use

but overall it is really good for the value.


----------



## Safeinthemountains (Apr 13, 2022)

OK, so if not faulty it is really good, a bit like the ES100 then ? 

Do you mean there are several reports of faulty units ? or just one or two ?

I'm really pissed off by those company who put all of their efforts on features, shiny looks, but not on durability, reliability, thinking that the targeted customer will not care as renewing equipment all the time is part of the game... or maybe it is just me that is completely out...

If I was sure this thing could last at least 5 years without recurrent problems, I would maybe put up to 200-250 $ but I still have the choice not to buy anything.


----------



## ClieOS

Safeinthemountains said:


> ...
> 
> If I was sure this thing could last at least 5 years without recurrent problems, I would maybe put up to 200-250 $ but I still have the choice not to buy anything.



Anything with a non-replaceable Li-ion battery inside that are regularly used / charged will not likely to last more than 3 years (or at least by the time will have terrible battery life). It is not an issue of durability but a matter of how Li-ion battery works / degrades with time and use. They are not meant to last forever, probably not even meant to last 5 years unless you don't use it much.


----------



## Safeinthemountains

It is not mandatory to make it in a way that the battery is sealed... I changed those batteries on various devices, but they were not easy to find and not always good quality ones... 
I know a flat 3.7v batt lifetime is not that great, even without using it, it has a defined "shelf life". But some can last more than others and if 3 years is already good, 5 years is not impossible... 😉


----------



## ClieOS

No, it is not mandatory - however, it is also not economical to design an user-replaceable battery either. FiiO actual explains in the past why it is so. The main reasons are: 1) battery component does take up much more space and make the design much more complex. 2) As battery is mostly custom ordered to fit the devices, stocking up replacement battery becomes very costly for the manufacturers for something that is essentially very niche in demand. Consider most models will be replaced / updated in a years or two, it is impractical for manufacturers to have all the different battery in stock, as battery themselves will degrade over time even in storage. It will be like throwing money away for the manufacturers. If big smartphone companies with millions of the same models in the market can't do it profitably / efficiently, it is pretty much impossible for small audio companies with only hundreds / thousands of the same model to do it without incurring very high cost.


----------



## Safeinthemountains

OK, I understand the point; durability is not an important criteria... So maybe I'm one of the few that would like polished products, that simply do the job, last as long as possible without any need for upgrades. Sorry but I don't like the fact that the economy is based on renewing things ever and ever. For example I think the ES100 didn't need much to be a perfect BT audio interface for years, but it didn't last...
When a product is well engineered, practical, I don't need to look for something else, I just appreciate the fuction it provides as is. I know, I know... this is not good for THE business, but marketing's goal is to make us never satisfied with what we have, always aiming, for better, or at least different stuff, and this pisses me off 

Sooner or later, we will be forced to keep things instead of producing tons of junk that we cannot even recycle, maybe one day durability will become 1st priority...


----------



## monsieurfromag3

Safeinthemountains said:


> OK, I understand the point; durability is not an important criteria... So maybe I'm one of the few that would like polished products, that simply do the job, last as long as possible without any need for upgrades. Sorry but I don't like the fact that the economy is based on renewing things ever and ever. For example I think the ES100 didn't need much to be a perfect BT audio interface for years, but it didn't last...
> When a product is well engineered, practical, I don't need to look for something else, I just appreciate the fuction it provides as is. I know, I know... this is not good for THE business, but marketing's goal is to make us never satisfied with what we have, always aiming, for better, or at least different stuff, and this pisses me off
> 
> Sooner or later, we will be forced to keep things instead of producing tons of junk that we cannot even recycle, maybe one day durability will become 1st priority...


A good word from Grenoble, one of a few French cities whose mayor stems from the Green party


----------



## Safeinthemountains

Yes, it is true, but don't be afraid, we have tons of "normal" people here that do not care at all... 
For me this is not especially "green" or "ecology-related", just common sense...


----------



## waynes world

Safeinthemountains said:


> just common sense...



Not enough of that in the world these days


----------



## Luke Skywalker

ClieOS said:


> No, it is not mandatory - however, it is also not economical to design an user-replaceable battery either. FiiO actual explains in the past why it is so. The main reasons are: 1) battery component does take up much more space and make the design much more complex. 2) As battery is mostly custom ordered to fit the devices, stocking up replacement battery becomes very costly for the manufacturers for something that is essentially very niche in demand. Consider most models will be replaced / updated in a years or two, it is impractical for manufacturers to have all the different battery in stock, as battery themselves will degrade over time even in storage. It will be like throwing money away for the manufacturers. If big smartphone companies with millions of the same models in the market can't do it profitably / efficiently, it is pretty much impossible for small audio companies with only hundreds / thousands of the same model to do it without incurring very high cost.


10180 batteries are itty bitty. That’s the cell I could see fitting in a bud.

DACs are another matter… I wish I could replace my HiBy R6 Pro battery with a fresh pair of 14500s


----------



## ClieOS

Xduoo Poke II added to the list. Size wise, Poke II is pretty much an Bluetooth DAC/amp, but it does has mic input so technically it can be used a BT adapter.


----------



## Sifflard

Hello,

This morning I dropped my beloved Qudelix in the water while it was still playing music. It immediately stopped working, but after drying it, it restarted to work in the evening and I restarted using it as usual. Unfortunately, some time after the right ear stopped working. I was using it balanced, but after trying with a 3.5 mm cable, both sides are working. 

On unbalanced and lower-quality cable, the sound seems more congested and bloated. Maybe some reverse placebo effect? I'm not sure about how balanced/unbalanced output works, but could it also be the result of having only one DAC operating instead of 2 in unbalanced mode ?

Anyway, I have some money I could use (but I also could use to buy new phones ^^) to :

- buy a new Qudelix (I really loved them and had no grief against them)
- Buy an Ifi Go blu (I'm a little annoyed to have to replace my 2.5 cables or to use an adaptor though).
- force me to use my setup as it is, and to convince myself that sound has probably only slightly degraded, or maybe only not by a perceptive difference ( I actually wasn't blown away when I switched to balanced and better cables).

I'm considering neither the shanling nor the Fiio, the former died after a few days and I couldn't get a replacement, and the fiio being more expensive than the Qudelix, while I'm still not sure I will like it. 

I'm wondering if there is a noticeable sq difference between the blu and the 5k, probably not twice better but 20 or 30 % better would make me consider.

So, what would you guys do ?


----------



## Ynot1

Khadas Tea is newer.


----------



## ClieOS

FiiO BTR7, unofficially announced on FB. Official announcement will be at June 2022. 4.4mm balanced + 3.5mm single ended, THX amp section. Hopefully we will see QCC5xxx this time.


----------



## PROblemdetected

ClieOS said:


> FiiO BTR7, unofficially announced on FB. Official announcement will be at June 2022. 4.4mm balanced + 3.5mm single ended, THX amp section. Hopefully we will see QCC5xxx this time.


Im worried about the price... But it looks fantastic


----------



## ClieOS

BTR7 measurements can be found here: https://www.l7audiolab.com/f/fiio-btr7/.

In sum: petty decent number. Not as good as higher end Type-C USB dongle, but plenty good for a Bluetooth focused DAC/Amp.


----------



## FiiO Willson

ClieOS said:


> BTR7 measurements can be found here: https://www.l7audiolab.com/f/fiio-btr7/.
> 
> In sum: petty decent number. Not as good as higher end Type-C USB dongle, but plenty good for a Bluetooth focused DAC/Amp.





This diagram basically introduces the main functions of BTR7


----------



## jmwant

FiiO Willson said:


> This diagram basically introduces the main functions of BTR7


Pretty feature-rich. FiiO says it'd also support eq on LDAC.


----------



## monsieurfromag3

I am dropping this here too since the BT cable thread is not very active and I think there’s a lot of overlap with this one: Null-Audio are updating their Nyx cable to support LDAC and aptX Adaptive. It will be the Nyx+, still with a dedicated class A amp. It’s about to launch, and about $25 more expensive than the original Nyx. Which was already a beast able to rival the nice BT receivers.


----------



## Physis

I have used YLM B2 in recent weeks. Because the sound was literally incredible, I share my appreciation of the sound. B2 has a sound signature similar to WM1Z or WA11. Yes, it means emotional and analog low sound and lively music playback ability. And middle and high notes are not masked by powerful low notes.  The B2 basically has a higher resolution and separation than the price range, but it has a superior tone (as described earlier). If you prefer a warm sound signature, YLM is by far the best brand. Normally, dac/amps in this price range usually have a 'roughness' in their sound. So I always think this after hearing them. "Oh, this sound is great for this price!" And I listen to music on my main device for over $1000. But B2 is completely different. B2's sound doesn't need to be crude, nor does it need to be price-conscious. B2 just plays amazing sound in itself. If you put SQ above all else, it's a must-listen device.


----------



## skeeb23

I'm a bit late to the party...but here are my thoughts and opinions on the ifi Go Blu!


----------



## C4PPY

monsieurfromag3 said:


> I am dropping this here too since the BT cable thread is not very active and I think there’s a lot of overlap with this one: Null-Audio are updating their Nyx cable to support LDAC and aptX Adaptive. It will be the Nyx+, still with a dedicated class A amp. It’s about to launch, and about $25 more expensive than the original Nyx. Which was already a beast able to rival the nice BT receivers.


Is there some information on this anywhere?


----------



## monsieurfromag3

C4PPY said:


> Is there some information on this anywhere?


Not yet, Null are really behind it seems, the sale that was supposed to start still hasn’t started. It will support LDAC and aptX Adaptive, but they have reverted to class D amplification, they told me it’s more efficient - for sure it is but will it sound as good? I hope so…


----------



## C4PPY

monsieurfromag3 said:


> Not yet, Null are really behind it seems, the sale that was supposed to start still hasn’t started. It will support LDAC and aptX Adaptive, but they have reverted to class D amplification, they told me it’s more efficient - for sure it is but will it sound as good? I hope so…


Make sense with the amplification for the power budget you have in the size of one of these BT receivers. 
Would you know the power output of the unit?


----------



## ClieOS

For those with a 1st batch Go Blu with weak BT range, here is a possible (but not easy) solution.


----------



## Strifeff7

Any news on the BTR7 ?


----------



## ClieOS

Strifeff7 said:


> Any news on the BTR7 ?



Still waiting for the new firmware to come (*which should be days away), otherwise pretty happy with it so far.


----------



## quimbo

My pre order from audio46 shipped yesterday.


----------



## povidlo

@ClieOS are you getting Dethonray Pegasus SG1?


----------



## C4PPY

Have you guys seen the news on the Toppings G5 which should be launched tomorrow. 
https://manuals.plus/topping/g5-high-performance-device-manual#axzz7c1JyEa1i

https://twitter.com/TOPPING2008/status/1559005280721141766


----------



## ClieOS

povidlo said:


> @ClieOS are you getting Dethonray Pegasus SG1?



SG1 can only be described as a disaster and should be avoided like plague. See measurement here.



C4PPY said:


> Have you guys seen the news on the Toppings G5 which should be launched tomorrow.
> https://manuals.plus/topping/g5-high-performance-device-manual#axzz7c1JyEa1i
> 
> https://twitter.com/TOPPING2008/status/1559005280721141766



Didn't find any mic input on the picture, so I assume it is not really an BT adapter but a full sized BT DAC/amp that is beyond the scope of the discussion.


----------



## C4PPY

ClieOS said:


> SG1 can only be described as a disaster and should be avoided like plague. See measurement here.
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't find any mic input on the picture, so I assume it is not really an BT adapter but a full sized BT DAC/amp that is beyond the scope of the discussion.


True, thought I saw something about mic.


----------



## ClieOS

C4PPY said:


> True, thought I saw something about mic.


While it is out of scope for the thread, I do just saw L7 release it's measurement here. It is pretty decent overall.


----------



## Aerione

Hey guys, the Hiby W3S seems to be on sale right now for a very good price, and I was wondering if anyone knows if it works in DAC mode when connected to the Nintendo Switch?

The console seems very fickle when it comes to DAC support, which is a shame because it happens to also have one of the worst built-in amp of any of my portable devices, probably even worse than my Vita.


----------



## solidshark91493

Hi guys, came to head fi again just to look at possible replacements for my Qudelix 5K.
Ive been extremely happy with it, however the clip broke, and I left it in my pocket and my fiance ended up running it through the washer and dryer a few months ago. 
Crazy enough the thing still works no problem.
(I think). The battery life is iffy now, and it sometimes has some connection issues. My warranty according to the app still has over 100 days left but Im not sure if they would, or what they could fix on it. 
They told me how to open it, and I could replace the battery and clean any possible corrosion inside but that doesnt change the clip being broken.
So I was wondering what you guys can recommend in that same price range? 
Not sure if music type matters for the amp, but I am running a pair of Moondrop blessing 2 IEM's with the upgraded Line K balanced 2.5 cable. I can get a 3.5, or a 4.5 balanced cable if need be. 
Was kinda looking at the new fiio btr7 but its kinda spendy and Id need a new cable.
Just curious what peoples opinions are.


----------



## Luke Skywalker

I’ve had a pretty good experience with my Questyle M15 using Vision EXT, JH Audio Lola, and even Audeze LCD-2 cans. However some people are dealing with EMI issues


----------



## ClieOS

Luke Skywalker said:


> I’ve had a pretty good experience with my Questyle M15 using Vision EXT, JH Audio Lola, and even Audeze LCD-2 cans. However some people are dealing with EMI issues


Isn't M15 an USB dongle and not a BT adapter?


----------



## Luke Skywalker

ClieOS said:


> Isn't M15 an USB dongle and not a BT adapter?


Ah yes... Sorry about that *head smack*


----------



## C_Lindbergh

Is there any APTX Adaptive adapter that works with IFi Go Blu's 5100 SoC? Unforutantly that the 5100 SoC was already dated upon the inital release of the product.


----------



## Deathman666

A quick comparison:

FiiO BTR3K, BTR5(2021), BTR7
Qudelix 5k
iFi GO blu

Listening via Bluetooth LDAC, 3.5mm unbalanced on Galaxy S21Ultra, mostly MP3 320kbps, also some FLAC. Custom Art Fibae 7 Unlimited Headphones.


Over the past 2 weeks I've had all these devices at home for audio and user interface comparisons.

I'll take the sound quickly, because apart from the iFi, which is slightly warmer, they all sound exactly the same. Some users write here about more details, more space, dynamics, etc. To my ears, they just play the same. The only difference is the performance if you need to wake up more demanding headphones. Which is not my case. And so, for me, the difference is mainly in the possibility of use.

I have had the BTR3K for two years now and am very happy with it. It is small, light, excellently made. Battery life around 7 hours, which is actually the only thing that bothers me a little about it. It happened to me several times that the juice ran out at the most inopportune moment and I had to listen to people in the public transport for God's sake  On the balanced output of 2.5 mm, the endurance is even worse. But this is logical and applies to all devices, with the difference that the BTR7 and Go blu have a balanced 4.4mm. The buttons on the side are quite small and not very easy to find blindly, but I got used to it. BT range very decent, throughout the apartment (75m2) without problems. The plastic clip is excellent for attaching to a belt, trousers, t-shirt, etc. And what is important, the device can be put in it in any way, so you can have the cable from the headphones downwards, which is invaluable if you have a cable with a straight connector. God how I hated Qudelix, but more on that later.

The BTR5 is actually exactly the same, it's just bigger and has more power if you need it. According to the documents, the battery life is even shorter (about 2 hours), but I did not measure it. The range of BT around the apartment is ok, but I know that some complain that even if the phone is in one pocket and the BTR5 is in the other pocket, they experience blackouts. I didn't have that problem anyway.

The BTR7 is already losing the concept of portable for me, moreover, the sharp edges are not pleasant. Case without a clip and an ugly gray color that gets dirty right away. The durability should be similar to BTR5. The performance is even slightly higher thanks to THX amplifiers. In my opinion, the display is just an unnecessary waste of energy. A huge sign of codec and encoding is useless. Anyway, everyone will only use LDAC and knows in which format they are listening. I still get the battery info, but since it doesn't show percentages and FiiO only gives battery info in a 100, 80, 60, 40, 20% way, it's also pretty irrelevant. The range of BT around the apartment is ok, I haven't tried anything else.




The Qudelix 5K is small, lightweight with a built-in clip. Unfortunately, it also has absolutely senselessly placed buttons that are opposite each other, so if you grab the device with two fingers, 90% of the time you press both. Also, their stroke is very poor and feels cheap. There is a tiny bump on the play/pause button, which is the only difference in how you can tell blindly where you are reaching. The control is just a pain for me. The built-in clip is nice, but since it is close to the body due to its thickness, it cannot be pulled away by pressing, which is sometimes problematic when trying to fasten it. Its biggest problem, however, is that the headphone connector points upwards after being clipped on, which, as I already wrote here, is firstly prone to breaking it and secondly, it stabs you either in the stomach if it is on a belt, or in the neck if it is often like me you fasten it to the T-shirt right at the neck. The battery life varies according to the manufacturer in the range of 6-20 hours depending on the settings. I got about 8 hours (LDAC, unbalanced) on the "Standard" profile and output power "Normal" with the EQ off. I don't really understand how you can get to some 13 hours, which some users give. If I turned on Performance and High, I would be much lower. But what's great about 5K is the app where you can set absolutely everything, including PEQ. The Bluetooth range is great, I had the opportunity to test it with my father-in-law, who has a huge two-story house, and I didn't notice any sign of a dropout anywhere.



I like iFi GO blu the most from the point of view of use, but everything is not as it seems at first glance. It is small, light and the volume control using the rotary control in which there is a built-in Play/Pause button is great and the best thought out of all. It's great to sew in my pocket! Battery life is also the best. I had 50% after seven hours, so I think 13 hours is realistic. Now for the negatives. The volume wheel is a little loose and it's not very pleasant. Overall, the workmanship was disappointing, as I discovered after unpacking that the front silver plastic cover had come off. According to the head-fi thread, I'm not alone. In addition, other users reported that both black parts were unglued, since the GO blu is the only one that is glued. The input for headphones is slightly avoided, which according to the photos, many owners have. Another thing is the annoying message about the codec. 99% of people will never change the codec and they know the one they have set, so they really don't need to hear EL DÝ EJ SI every time they turn on the device, even if.. the voice that says it is really sexy. This device will not be suitable for sensitive headphones either. Even at very low volume, background noise can be heard, which is intensified by turning on XBass and more XSpace functions, which are otherwise well implemented and do not distort (XBass at all, XSpace a little) the sound. Bluetooth range is the worst here, I experienced dropouts in different parts of the apartment where others were fine. A case with a clip can be bought for 30e(!) and is really ugly and makes the device much bigger. In addition.. the case must be part of the package, after all it is a portable BT DAC for God's sake, where is one supposed to put it? And I don't really take it into my pocket as a solution. This also applies to the BTR7, although portability can already be debated there.



The bottom line is that I stuck with the good old BTR3K because as befits such a device, it is small, light, has a clip that I can put it in as I need it, decent durability and plays as well as the others. In addition, it is the cheapest, and by a lot compared to some others. For an IEM, the performance is absolutely sufficient. We'll see what happens next in this still quite limited segment.

(my english is bad so google translate)


----------



## marekm

Deathman666 said:


> Bluetooth range is the worst here,



iFi Go Blu's trademark


----------

