2. digital
  3. 124451-18790

"High End" Bluetooth Receivers - Snake Oil?

I've been doing some research on the net, and came across a post somewhere (wish I'd have bookmarked it, because now I can't find it again) talking about Bluetooth receivers, lossy compression, etc., that wasn't very complementary of the "high end" receivers.  Of course we have the positively reviewed Audioengine B1 with the AKM "Miracle" DAC, the Auris BluMe with the same DAC, the Arcam rBlink and miniBlink with Burr Brown DAC's, and others with the Wolfson DAC out there on the market claiming "CD quality" sound.

I'm far from technical, so this may be askew, but evidently, given the compression and decompression algorithms, lossy this and lossy that, low bit rates, and other inherent limitations (including AptX), Bluetooth audio can only be so good.  The up-sampling, high bit rates, etc. of these "high end" receivers/DAC's is not capable of restoring or elevating Bluetooth streaming to anywhere near CD quality levels.  Supposedly it has to do with the compression algorithms that simply cannot be fixed with up-sampling, etc.  I guess like a sailboat, it's speed is limited by physics, so no matter how much power you have, it'll only go so fast.

Thoughts?
seadweller
13 responses Add your response
jwilsco's avatar
jwilsco
30 posts
 
Who are the top players in the Bluetooth speaker industry?
ottoa63's avatar
ottoa63
36 posts
 
audioman2015  could you elaborate a little "how to" do what your are doing with Wi Fi and PCM,,,not sure I follow.. I'd appreciate it... Im about to buy the AE  BL1...this is interesting...
milpai's avatar
milpai
2,307 posts
 
OP,
I feel you should try the newer units from Auris, Arcam, Audioengine, etc. These are phenomenal units. I recently purchased the Auris bluMe for my system and I simply cannot stop streaming Spotify, FolkAlley, etc. I am amazed at the sound quality of the unit. I have not compared this to hi-rez stuff. But at least it comes close to standard CD and you can audition new music (new to you, but maybe been there forever) all the time. Ignore advise from the folks who have not heard the newer units. You want to enjoy your music or your resolution? You can always listen to BT music and then purchase hi-rez copy of the music knowing that you will like what you just heard.
oddiofyl's avatar
oddiofyl
3,446 posts
 
I bought the Yamaha YBA-11 Bluetooth RX and it works great.  I bought it because it had a SPDIF output.  My M51 dac does a great job, Spotify and wav. files sound great from my tablet via Blutooth. $50 well spent.
wtf's avatar
wtf
307 posts
 
Mapman .. various really, some friends have Android phones and others, like me, use an iPhone. Apple only does Bluetooth 4.0 and not APTX but the W4S gizmo makes quite a difference either way IMO. Very handy during a party or casual get together! I took a chance on it because their other reclockers have garnered quite a bit of praise and rightfully so.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,823 posts
 

I have a Bluetooth speaker I use that sounds very good for what it is (Harmon Kardon Onyx Studio 2). It uses Bluetooth 3.


I also only use wifi currently to my good hifi systems but am optimistic with the latest and greatest Bluetooth technology for hifi sound from what I read and may give something like the Audio Engine a shot at some point and see what I might hear. :^)

Clearly, Bluetooth is designed to function with less power and range is more limited compared to wifi.


audioman2015
103 posts
 
I stay away from Bluetooth streaming because all aptX codecs are severely hindered. They don't allow for raw streaming of PCM data. I use wifi to stream PCM to a dac without any compression. Now saying that, if implemented properly, aptX doesn’t sound bad but why use it when I can just use wifi streaming?
czarivey
5,657 posts
 
Harman Kardon BT receiver in Benz e-class works very good.

mapman's avatar
mapman
21,823 posts
 
wtf what Bluetooth device did you use it with?  Thanks.
wtf's avatar
wtf
307 posts
 
I purchased a Wyred 4 Sound bLINK reclocker when it was released last December and I'm still amazed at what it does for Bluetooth. No snake oil there either, just good engineering.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,823 posts
 
I agree with kijanki.   Audio engine is a reputable company with a focus on sound quality claiming cd quality sound for their Bluetooth 4 based device and I see no technical reason that would not be possible as described.     I suspect no snake oil there.   
elevick
2,636 posts
 
All bluetooth units are not created equal.  I can tell you that streaming hi res Tidal through my audioengine into a Chord Hugo and it was simply amazing.  I'd put it against almost anything.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,394 posts
 
I'm don't know what is available, but I cannot see reason why not.  CD quality requires bit rate only of 1.4Mb/s while Bluetooth can go as high as 25Mb/s.  Transfer itself doesn't matter since timing is attached later (data transfer in packets).  Sound will depend on stability of this timing only, assuming lossless compression.
Log in to respond
More to discover
80x80
Marantz SA-14
80x80
Esoteric K-01
80x80
Jeff Rowland Aeris