It is now possible to stream LDAC from Windows without VM, dongle, or other shenanigans.

[gerG]

I appologize if this is old news, but I just stumbled across it. There is a bit of software called Alternative A2DP Driver that lets Windwoes transmit LDAC (or other codecs) directly. This assumes, of course, that the computer already has bluetooth capability.
The software lives here: https://www.bluetoothgoodies.com/a2dp/
It is not free. The cost is around $5 for the first computer (perpetual license) and $2 for additional computers. Free to try for a week, though.
The software is more than just a driver. It allows selection of codecs, bit rates, and other tweaks that I have yet to explore.
I am running it right now with a laptop computer streaming to an smsl C200, with nothing but air in between. No hacking was required. I just followed the instructions and it worked as advertised. That just doesn't seem right, does it?
Happy listenings.
gerG

 

[OnLyTNT]

I have this software both on my home and office computers. It works like a charm. In my small office room, I use a simple BT adapter; for home I bought a Class1 adapter with antennas to extend to range. One thing to mind, If there is a Wi-Fi device like modem etc. it might deteriorate the signal quality of BT. So far, I'm happy with the software.

 

[Rja4000]

Hi

Thanks for pointing this.

I gave it a try.

It works OK.
Some instability during my 1h testing, but Windows is probably guilty of most issues.


I repeated some of the tests from my review of the Fiio BTA30 pro.
(All tests at 96kHz 24 bits)



With Topping BC3 as a receiver
(> Toslink > RME ADI-2/4 Pro SE)

I get even better performance than with my Samsung Note 9

With Fiio BTA30 Pro as a receiver
(> Toslink > RME ADI-2/4 Pro SE)

We see the same 16 bits limitation than with my smartphone.
That just confirms the issue is with the BTA30 Pro, not with the smartphone.

With Topping D90LE DAC as a receiver
(> 5V Analog out > RME ADI-2/4 Pro SE in Mono)

Both devices are state of the art.
We loose nothing in performance from the DA-AD process.
The limitation is the LDAC CODEC.

Thanks !

 

[Berwhale]

I found it pretty unreliable when I tried it, audio quality was very poor due to constant breakup. I suspect this is due to the very cheap USB Bluetooth adapter I was using.

 

[m1lhaus]

I discovered that app by a chance recently. I am using it for a second week and I have to say it works great. Initially I had issues with random stutters (pops) which I was not not experiencing from my phone. I found out it was caused by interference with another device. I had my BT receiver placed next to my Loxjie A30. Even with BT antenna detached, Loxjie seems to emit BT even though I am on analog input. After placing my receiver elsewhere I have a smooth experience with LDAC on highest bitrate from my laptop.

 

[nagster]

I appologize if this is old news, but I just stumbled across it. There is a bit of software called Alternative A2DP Driver that lets Windwoes transmit LDAC (or other codecs) directly. This assumes, of course, that the computer already has bluetooth capability.
The software lives here: https://www.bluetoothgoodies.com/a2dp/
It is not free. The cost is around $5 for the first computer (perpetual license) and $2 for additional computers. Free to try for a week, though.
The software is more than just a driver. It allows selection of codecs, bit rates, and other tweaks that I have yet to explore.
I am running it right now with a laptop computer streaming to an smsl C200, with nothing but air in between. No hacking was required. I just followed the instructions and it worked as advertised. That just doesn't seem right, does it?
Happy listenings.
gerG

thank you.
As far as I know, there was no way for the APx software to directly recognize devices that are using LDAC communication. Until now, it was either an indirect measurement via an LDAC-compatible BT transmitter, or an open-loop measurement.
Furthermore, for SBC and aptX, it is now possible to specify the codec and control details from the windows side. Until now, it was difficult, so it was not practical.
Of course, closed-loop measurement is possible, so there are no restrictions and it is easier.

 

[Berwhale]

I found it pretty unreliable when I tried it, audio quality was very poor due to constant breakup. I suspect this is due to the very cheap USB Bluetooth adapter I was using.

The motherboard in my newly built PC has Wi-fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.3 on-board with a nice desktop antenna. Alternative A2DP Driver is working much better now (tested with Qudelix 5K), so I bought a license.

 

[Abrise]

Alternative a2dp driver Bluetooth SBC and LDAC measurement testing and comparison

My main setup htpc lost its power supply last week. Waiting for repair I couldn’t stay without quality music. I thus use my old surface pro 2017 together with this superb Alternative A2DP Driver to drive my system. Thanks to @gerG to have introduce it.

I wanted to use the portable computer because I could then keep the benefit of convolution room correction which is not possible as far as I know with an android phone.

Although it is a well-known fact that LDAC is good. I have tested the driver with the surface pro and SMSL-D6s. With a Bluetooth chip that is quite old I couldn’t get stability with better than LDAC SQ medium quality ie 660kB/s. HQ would need 990kBit/s, I cannot achieve it.

First let’s check from where we are starting from

Test with standard SBC windows drivers for comparison basis.

Surface standard driver Bluetooth to SMSL-D6s to E1da cosmos stereo mode-green led. The E1DA cosmos is good enough to make valid measurements.

Standard SBC THD+N at 1000Hz is -66dB, the distortion is drown into noise. Bad results where expected of course.

Multitone result is not brilliant: 8 to 10 bit only definition

Surface with Alternative A2DP driver with sbc is 3 to 4dB better but nothing significative. I also tried to increase the SBC bitpool up to 110 almost doubling the SBC speed to 642 kBit/s, it did give better results but not yet good enough

Multitone SBC Bitpool 110 apparently more than 20dB to 30 dB better than standard SBC .

Surface with Bluetooth Alternative A2DP driver with LDAC SQ Medium Quality settings.

I couldn’t test the High Quality settings that would give a speed of 960 kbit/s, but the Medium Quality already provides quite good results.

Test with 1000Hz signal, THD+N of -116dB . It is 50dB better than the standard drivers and looks almost as good as the USB input!

Bandwidth start to decline a bit early at 15kHz. Some people may not like it, I don’t mind as it is perfect until there.

Test THD+N function of frequency. The results are excellent. One can notice that THD is always neglectable compared to noise. THD+N curve is almost the same as the N curve.

Blue THD+N; Green Noise ; White distortion

Test with 19 and 20 khz signal

Surface LDAC IMD din test excellent -110db

And now Multitone the most difficult test .It gives 18 bits until 10-12kHz . Results are not as good above 13kHz but I believe that this higher distortion is not audible.

The above multitone test has been done with SMSL D6s below is the multitone test with the Topping E70. It shows very similar results thus the tests are not DAC dependent and that probably the shape of multitone at higher frequency is a LDAC thing.

As a conclusion results are very satisfactory with PC and LDAC even with SQ medium quality 660kBit/s, I do not need LDAC HQ 990 kB/s. I am very happy with this Alternative A2DP driver . I can now use my laptop and Bluetooth and getting excellent sound quality.

 

[Abrise]

And now Multitone the most difficult test .It gives 18 bits until 10-12kHz . Results are not as good above 13kHz but I believe that this higher distortion is not audible.
View attachment 322639


The above multitone test has been done with SMSL D6s below is the multitone test with the Topping E70. It shows very similar results thus the tests are not DAC dependent and that probably the shape of multitone at higher frequency is a LDAC thing.
View attachment 322640






As a conclusion results are very satisfactory with PC and LDAC even with SQ medium quality 660kBit/s, I do not need LDAC HQ 990 kB/s. I am very happy with this Alternative A2DP driver . I can now use my laptop and Bluetooth and getting excellent sound quality.

I would be pleased if a specialist can give explanation on LDAC Multitone behavior above 12 kHz

 

[Rja4000]

I would be pleased if a specialist can give explanation on LDAC Multitone behavior above 12 kHz

I'm not a specialist, but I guess that's a technique LDAC uses to shape noise and increase audible range performance with the limited bandwidth.

 

[Leiker535]

Thought it would be interesting to see the difference between multiple codecs, specially with aptx and aptx HD, which seldom appears here and is the main competitor against LDAC, so I did my own amateur measurements (emphasis on amateur) on my Focusrite 2i2. Unfortunately, I don't have a SINAD transparent source, and used my FiiO BTR3K. This all done using the 3.5mm out with no extra gain on the interface.

Here it is:

Baseline Focusrite loop (dB and %)

SBC

APTX (non HD)

APTX HD

LDAC (highest setting)

 

[Abrise]

Thought it would be interesting to see the difference between multiple codecs, specially with aptx and aptx HD, which seldom appears here and is the main competitor against LDAC, so I did my own amateur measurements (emphasis on amateur) on my Focusrite 2i2. Unfortunately, I don't have a SINAD transparent source, and used my FiiO BTR3K. This all done using the 3.5mm out with no extra gain on the interface.

Here it is:

Baseline Focusrite loop (dB and %)
View attachment 322966

View attachment 322967


SBC

View attachment 322964

APTX (non HD)


View attachment 322968

APTX HD



View attachment 322969

LDAC (highest setting)

View attachment 322970

I also own a focusrite and I found it's measured performance very disapointing so I only use it for room correction measurements. However if your measurements are at least 10dB better than your Focusrite, they are probably valid to give the performance of your FiiO BTR3K. But you have measured at -20 to -23 dBFs. The issue being mainly noise you should have tried to measure close to full scale at in and out level. I doubt anyway that with focusrite you can have valid results with LDAC+FiiO BTR3K.
You should also state the BLuetooth chip generation in the computer. Mine is 4.2.

 

[Leiker535]

I also own a focusrite and I found it's measured performance very disapointing so I only use it for room correction measurements. However if your measurements are at least 10dB better than your Focusrite, they are probably valid to give the performance of your FiiO BTR3K. But you have measured at -20 to -23 dBFs. The issue being mainly noise you should have tried to measure close to full scale at in and out level. I doubt anyway that with focusrite you can have valid results with LDAC+FiiO BTR3K.
You should also state the BLuetooth chip generation in the computer. Mine is 4.2.

Ok, so I went and redid the measurements adding a bit of gain to the focusrite line in in order to get to get more than -10dBFS scale. For some reason I couldn't get that with max volume on the dongle, and so didn't do it because I feared I would be adding noise to the signal, but it actually didn't.

My dongle chip is 5.0 btw. Here are the results:

It was interesting seeing LDAC getting the lead now.

EDIT: seeing your multitone had me figuring. In mine, all the codecs behave poorly like yours (-26dB margin), except LDAC:

 

[Abrise]

Ok, so I went and redid the measurements adding a bit of gain to the focusrite line in in order to get to get more than -10dBFS scale. For some reason I couldn't get that with max volume on the dongle, and so didn't do it because I feared I would be adding noise to the signal, but it actually didn't.

My dongle chip is 5.0 btw. Here are the results:


View attachment 323240
View attachment 323248
View attachment 323235
View attachment 323237
View attachment 323236
View attachment 323238View attachment 323239

It was interesting seeing LDAC getting the lead now.

EDIT: seeing your multitone had me figuring. In mine, all the codecs behave poorly like yours (-26dB margin), except LDAC:

View attachment 323246View attachment 323247View attachment 323243

Now for SBC AAC APTX and APTX HD your results are as expected. For LDAC the results are limited by the focusrite. LDAC is even better than that.
For the multitone test and for ease of reading you should set REW generator to multtone Octave 1/3 Octave. Also you can optimize the RTA window readings with the 'set graph axis limit' on the top right so that the graphs fill the windows.

 

[Abrise]

Alternative a2dp driver Bluetooth SBC and LDAC measurement testing and comparison

My main setup htpc lost its power supply last week. Waiting for repair I couldn’t stay without quality music. I thus use my old surface pro 2017 together with this superb Alternative A2DP Driver to drive my system. Thanks to @gerG to have introduce it.

I wanted to use the portable computer because I could then keep the benefit of convolution room correction which is not possible as far as I know with an android phone.

Although it is a well-known fact that LDAC is good. I have tested the driver with the surface pro and SMSL-D6s. With a Bluetooth chip that is quite old I couldn’t get stability with better than LDAC SQ medium quality ie 660kB/s. HQ would need 990kBit/s, I cannot achieve it.

First let’s check from where we are starting from

Test with standard SBC windows drivers for comparison basis.

Surface standard driver Bluetooth to SMSL-D6s to E1da cosmos stereo mode-green led. The E1DA cosmos is good enough to make valid measurements.

Standard SBC THD+N at 1000Hz is -66dB, the distortion is drown into noise. Bad results where expected of course.
View attachment 322630





Multitone result is not brilliant: 8 to 10 bit only definition


View attachment 322631




Surface with Alternative A2DP driver with sbc is 3 to 4dB better but nothing significative. I also tried to increase the SBC bitpool up to 110 almost doubling the SBC speed to 642 kBit/s, it did give better results but not yet good enough

Multitone SBC Bitpool 110 apparently more than 20dB to 30 dB better than standard SBC .

View attachment 322632



Surface with Bluetooth Alternative A2DP driver with LDAC SQ Medium Quality settings.

I couldn’t test the High Quality settings that would give a speed of 960 kbit/s, but the Medium Quality already provides quite good results.

Test with 1000Hz signal, THD+N of -116dB . It is 50dB better than the standard drivers and looks almost as good as the USB input!
View attachment 322633


Bandwidth start to decline a bit early at 15kHz. Some people may not like it, I don’t mind as it is perfect until there.
View attachment 322635


Test THD+N function of frequency. The results are excellent. One can notice that THD is always neglectable compared to noise. THD+N curve is almost the same as the N curve.

Blue THD+N; Green Noise ; White distortion
View attachment 322636


Test with 19 and 20 khz signal
View attachment 322637




Surface LDAC IMD din test excellent -110db

View attachment 322638





And now Multitone the most difficult test .It gives 18 bits until 10-12kHz . Results are not as good above 13kHz but I believe that this higher distortion is not audible.
View attachment 322639


The above multitone test has been done with SMSL D6s below is the multitone test with the Topping E70. It shows very similar results thus the tests are not DAC dependent and that probably the shape of multitone at higher frequency is a LDAC thing.
View attachment 322640






As a conclusion results are very satisfactory with PC and LDAC even with SQ medium quality 660kBit/s, I do not need LDAC HQ 990 kB/s. I am very happy with this Alternative A2DP driver . I can now use my laptop and Bluetooth and getting excellent sound quality.

Continuation of my above post.
My tests above were made with the Surface pro bluetooth which is a 4.2 generation. To go further with bluetooth and windows I have purchased for 6€ a dongle Bluetooth 5.3.
and test it. The 2 following graphs show that bluetooth has become completely transparent.

THD+N with bluetooth HQ 990kBits/is just marginally improved as it was already excellent in SQ to -117.6dB just 2dB better but noise 5dB lower

But the real and important improvement is with multitone. 21 bits distortion free until 15kHz and not bad at all after. This is really excellent.

We can say now than connecting a PC via USB or Bluetooth 5.3 LDAC is equivalent and gives the same audio quality.
My dongle is stable in HQ until a distance of around 4 m.

 

[Leiker535]

Continuation of my above post.
My tests above were made with the Surface pro bluetooth which is a 4.2 generation. To go further with bluetooth and windows I have purchased for 6€ a dongle Bluetooth 5.3.
and test it. The 2 following graphs show that bluetooth has become completely transparent.

THD+N with bluetooth HQ 990kBits/is just marginally improved as it was already excellent in SQ to -117.6dB just 2dB better but noise 5dB lower
View attachment 323391

But the real and important improvement is with multitone. 21 bits distortion free until 15kHz and not bad at all after. This is really excellent.
View attachment 323392

We can say now than connecting a PC via USB or Bluetooth 5.3 LDAC is equivalent and gives the same audio quality.
My dongle is stable in HQ until a distance of around 4 m.

Those results are better than most wired DACs Amirm has reviewed, LDAC really is a marvel.

How does the connection holds up when in HQ for you? Here it's very spotty if the dongle has anything between it and the receiver, or over 1m distances.

 

[Abrise]

Those results are better than most wired DACs Amirm has reviewed, LDAC really is a marvel.

How does the connection holds up when in HQ for you? Here it's very spotty if the dongle has anything between it and the receiver, or over 1m distances.

Stability very much depends on your emitter and reveiver. My dongle is new design 5.3 and my DAC is state of the art smsl D6s, I suppose it gets a good bluetooth chip. I have not tested at the limit but at 3-4 meters HQ is no problem

 

[rgooding]

Hi
first off, damn you guys are Einstein level with the comparisons and measurements - I'm just a guy who wants better sounding music off a reasonably priced headphone set, but the gist of it seems to be that this software is worth purchasing for windows 11 and LDAC support now in 11/2023??
Also as I'm trialing this software as well, one thing i read is that the software itself cuts out intermittently to let you remember you've not paid for it and maybe this is what some of you are noticing as an intermittent cut out (and maybe not Bluetooth interference?)
anyways it seems like I'm spending the $5.99 or $8.99 for now.

(be aware that i am the most dangerous idiot known to man - a generalist, knowing nothing in depth, but willing to speak up on everything

 

[Abrise]

Hi
first off, damn you guys are Einstein level with the comparisons and measurements - I'm just a guy who wants better sounding music off a reasonably priced headphone set, but the gist of it seems to be that this software is worth purchasing for windows 11 and LDAC support now in 11/2023??
Also as I'm trialing this software as well, one thing i read is that the software itself cuts out intermittently to let you remember you've not paid for it and maybe this is what some of you are noticing as an intermittent cut out (and maybe not Bluetooth interference?)
anyways it seems like I'm spending the $5.99 or $8.99 for now.

(be aware that i am the most dangerous idiot known to man - a generalist, knowing nothing in depth, but willing to speak up on everything

I had no problem at all with this software. I have paid for the aac option but you don't need it. I think it is worth purchasing

 

[MrOtto]

I bought the licence under trial period. $6, without AAC. No need since i choose LDAC, then SBC. Not AAC or aptX. My Shure Aonic 50 is connected to LDAC 909kbps in Win11.