BC3 has a larger form factor and doesn't have a carrying clip. BC3 can be used to complement a desktop DAC, but it is not as practical as a mobile device.I think Topping's BC3 is a no brainer if it's Bluetooth that you want
BC3 has a larger form factor and doesn't have a carrying clip. BC3 can be used to complement a desktop DAC, but it is not as practical as a mobile device.I think Topping's BC3 is a no brainer if it's Bluetooth that you want
And for 23 usd you have the regular Meizu HiFi DAC doing SINAD 115 (Amir's test had ground loop and resulted in high distortion SINAD 98, but running on a cell phone it goes to spec as seen here), and also more power 49 mW at 33 ohms.Not to defend the poor performance of the BTR3, but the Apple dongle outperforms a surprising number of desktop devices.
View attachment 149414
Yes, it lacks only voltage/power, but in this case it doesn't lose even in that comparison.Not to defend the poor performance of the BTR3, but the Apple dongle outperforms a surprising number of desktop devices.
View attachment 149414
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Fiio BTR3 portable USB-C Dac and bluetooth wireless receiver.
I have one of their other dongles, which seems like the same device, except it connects via a mini spdif connection instead of USB.
I only got it to turn a wired set of IEMs into BT capable - meaning the IEM's don't have to be physically connected to my phone for listening.
I suspect a lot of users buy such devices for a similar scenario.
So judged solely as a BT device, it probably sounds about as good as one would expect. No one listens to BT from their phone and expects hi-end sound.
Some of the IEMs are well-loved among that crowd. My ears don't get along with IEMs so I can't comment one way or another. Overall, they seem to do a decent job of industrial design but a lot of the amp/DAC designs fall short of competitors in terms of performance.Hmmm...
Does Fiio make any top-tier products? Or do I dare ask any above average? Links or product models are welcomed.
And for 23 usd you have the regular Meizu HiFi DAC doing SINAD 115 (Amir's test had ground loop and resulted in high distortion SINAD 98, but running on a cell phone it goes to spec as seen here), and also more power 49 mW at 33 ohms.
As far as I know, the regular Meizu HiFi DAC is the best buy in entry level dongle DACs today.
View attachment 149422
I mainly use mine to listen to HE4XX (35 Ohm, 93 dB/mW), ATH-M40x (35 Ohm, 98 dB/mW), SHP-9500 (32 Ohm, 101 dB/mW), Tin T2 (16.5 Ohm, 111.56 dB/mW) and if I'm understanding this correctly, I should be able to get 106 dB, 111 dB, 115 dB, 128 dB SPL respectively. It's probably why it hasn't been an issue for me. I don't listen loud enough to need more than max. It would be nice if it could provide 1.5V though.
All of the above.1. Closed loop via the USB Type-C interface, which I assume requires you to install an ASIO driver for the player to interface with the APx555.
2. Closed loop using Roon. Or maybe open loop?
Or did you only use Roon as the source for music playback through the player via WASAPI?
it says 'same as wired' but it's not, well, AUDIBLY it is, but on the response curve as it approaches 20kHz it suddenly decreases where the bluetooth removes signal.
Since LDAC is not 'lossless' it cannot be 'same as wired'. This had me stumped so I searched for what Amir missed ... a tiny fragment but it's there!
Totally agree it doesn't matter, I love LDAC, have it in two headphones and two portable devices. I was just wondering where the lossy was since LDAC is lossy.The noise floor and harmonic distortion are pretty essentially identical. That's why he said it. As far as LDAC being lossy, that's true, but it's not the weak link here.
It would be interesting to measure the SINAD of LDAC with musical content. Starting with a music file, let's add a synchronization mark at the beginning and play the file through LDAC. Using the synchronization mark to align samples, compute the difference.
Totally agree it doesn't matter, I love LDAC, have it in two headphones and two portable devices. I was just wondering where the lossy was since LDAC is lossy.
And I like poking at Amir and his "objective" point of view (human beings are not capable of objectivity, around here they confuse objective and repeatable measurement. They think something is objective just because it is measured. They don't realize as soon as you define a set of measurements as having meaning, you've become subjective.
Wrong my friend, not much familiar with the scientific method i see, if you define a set of objective measurements to have a meaning gives you much more chances to show true reality, than using subjective measurements.
Again, human hearing is great to enjoy music but lousy tool to make precise measurements.
Does it really matter if we can not hear the difference? well not all ears are the same and some people may hear subtle differences that other don't, anyway in my case and many i suspect, if i will buy a gear for music, why not to get the best, even if it questionable i would hear the difference.
I agree. Except I'd point out that 'more chances' is not '100%' is not objective. Easy to show to people have two different sets of measurements, which is objective?Wrong my friend, not much familiar with the scientific method i see, if you define a set of objective measurements to have a meaning gives you much more chances to show true reality, than using subjective measurements.
I agree. Except I'd point out that 'more chances' is not '100%' is not objective. Easy to show to people have two different sets of measurements, which is objective?