Not true at all. I have years of personal experience that is completely contrary to your assertion. There is no technical reason that properly implemented Bluetooth sacrifices any sound quality for normal music enjoyment.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Sony Xperia 5 IV Audio Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
And now you are just trolling. There are in fact plenty of technical reasons why Bluetooth objectively sacrifices sound quality, starting from the simple facts that it is a) utilizes lossy compression and b) "properly implemented" Bluetooth headphones are as rare as hen's teeth. Sure, it is possible to enjoy music even on AM radio, it all depends on the definition of "normal music enjoyment".
Yes, under ideal conditions with high bitrate LDAC quality can be very good (probably many people will not be able to distinguish from a good wired connection). Now, start moving or increase a bit the distance between Bluetooth transmitter and headphones - and the things will fall apart very fast.
Back off there, you have no grounds to accuse me of trolling. You don't have to agree with me, and that is fine, but for you to have taken it to the next level with no provocative is significantly over the top.
And for the record, I don't know of more than a handful of valid blind listening tests where people can tell the difference. Of the few that I have ever read about, the people essentially train themselves to detect very subtle differences that they work to discriminate. If you're just listening to music normally, Bluetooth is extremely capable of essentially audible transparency.
I conducted a multiple trial, blind listening test at a headfi meet I hosted. With very good equipment and multiple trials with 7 different young subjects not one of them could do better than around 50% (guessing) telling a 320 mp3 from the lossless master. People assume discrimination abilities but really don't test them.
I conducted a multiple trial, blind listening test at a headfi meet I hosted. With very good equipment and multiple trials with 7 different young subjects not one of them could do better than around 50% (guessing) telling a 320 mp3 from the lossless master. People assume discrimination abilities but really don't test them.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #345
320 kbps mp3 has far better quality than that Bluetooth codecs other than LDAC. SBC for example was selected because it was free and didn't take much CPU cycles. There was no requirement from Bluetooth forum for any type of fidelity. We (Microsoft) wanted to bid a higher fidelity codec but ours took more CPU cycles so we gave up. And codecs such as aptX are even worse. See: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...c3-review-bluetooth-receiver-bt-codecs.23740/
AAC profile used there is even worse:
One of the challenges for BT and what makes it hard is to produce quality audio is having to have very low latency/buffering. Audio has sharply varying complexity from moment to moment. Classic lossy codecs such as MP3 and AAC use a memory buffer to smooth out the peaks and wind up with a much lower average rate. You can't do much of this if you require the data to get to the other side without say, half a second latency.
So while it is true that most audiophiles have poor ability to detect non-linearities, BT codec impairments (again, other than LDAC) are too much to say hardly anyone can hear it.
Not sure what to think. I had my Gustard X16 going into my NAD M3 with some very nice Monitor Audio PL200 supported by two nice subs. My M3 allowed me to send everything below 40Hz to the subs.320 kbps mp3 has far better quality than that Bluetooth codecs other than LDAC. SBC for example was selected because it was free and didn't take much CPU cycles. There was no requirement from Bluetooth forum for any type of fidelity. We (Microsoft) wanted to bid a higher fidelity codec but ours took more CPU cycles so we gave up. And codecs such as aptX are even worse. See: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...c3-review-bluetooth-receiver-bt-codecs.23740/
AAC profile used there is even worse:
One of the challenges for BT and what makes it hard is to produce quality audio is having to have very low latency/buffering. Audio has sharply varying complexity from moment to moment. Classic lossy codecs such as MP3 and AAC use a memory buffer to smooth out the peaks and wind up with a much lower average rate. You can't do much of this if you require the data to get to the other side without say, half a second latency.
So while it is true that most audiophiles have poor ability to detect non-linearities, BT codec impairments (again, other than LDAC) are too much to say hardly anyone can hear it.
Not that this is a great system, but certainly adequate. I only played well recorded, dynamic material and used Bluetooth exclusively from my phone to the X16 and I never once noticed anything and I listened both critically and for pleasure.
I still think that most people, maybe even the vast majority of users would not actually be able to reliably ndetect a difference with even AAC. Would love to see the results of proper testing though. I would be prepared to eat humble pie.
Technically It does have a pretty big impact BT is not a super consistent or or secure connection which is why its so susceptible to interference and dropouts. You can take a flipper zero and just destroy everyone's Bluetooth connections near you in like a 100 ft radius. same w/ regards to the compression codecs as well. Diff codecs all have different levels of transfer compression, encoding, and latency. MiniDSP also has a metric comparison showing the diff between AAC & LDAC. I think the avg normie prob cant pick up on it, but I've been able to tell the diff via AB testing pretty accurately. There are noticeable boosts or high cutoffs depending on the compression you use.
You've tested blind, multiple trials, at least 10 and discriminated the difference at least 90% of the time? If not, while I believe that you believe you can reliably tell the difference, respectfully you haven't effectively tested your belief.
ThatGuyYouKnow
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2023
- Messages
- 146
- Likes
- 141
I don't think you are trolling and are at least being respectful, which is sort of refreshing given all the off-topic garbage I see elsewhere on this forum. From my perspective, though, I have never heard what I consider acceptable Bluetooth audio. Getting those ideal conditions could plausibly be out of reach for many of us.
I mean I only had my one IEM, and i was testing on the train tbh which would make it even harder to discern, I was just testing a bluetooth dongle that I ended up returning because I find myself never really using Bluetooth anyways. I do think I could discerningly tell you which was LDAC, APTX, & SBC At least 75%+ of the time as long as I knew the song/track well enough. I havent tested again since, because I dont own the dongle anymore. But i distinctly remember being able to discern the difference in noisefloor between them as well depending on which codec you picked. It was a decent Fiio Bluetooth adapter as well, but keep in mind I was on a train ride so that in itself is pretty impressive that I could make it out. If you asked me to AB test it again Id prob need to kinda trial and error psychologically but I think id be pretty good at being able to tell you which was a higher birate stream. But it would have to be between a lower bit rate codec against 990kb LDAC, it was significantly much less discernable between APTX codecs and AAC/SBC.
Ironically I also dont care about the quality of the stream since my default listening platforms are Youtube Music and Soundcloud anyways both are notoriously compressed so maybe it was being able to discern something that was already fairly lossy on top of BT compression.
Though based on the difference just on shear measurements if you look at just the SINAD 70db vs 100+ should already be pretty apparent for a lot of people. If you've ever owned a bad measuring DAC its pretty easy to discern that. Imo I've been thinking here on ASR for a long time now why don't we have a standard for bad if we know that 80db+ sinad is a decent starting point for good/passable. Cause I do own a DAC that I think will 100% measure like trash and Its def discernible because things sound slightly warmer, fuzzier and distorted and theres a lot of pops and ticks in it. I think that would give people a general idea of range for where audibly bad starts.
Last edited:
Hello Amir,
Is it possible to measure the recorded microphone quality of this phone? I have the Samsung s10e, also owned many samsungs in the past and found them to be superior to many other phones i have tried. I have not tried Sony. This is important for me because I record singing and also live music events. I know this is a very niche feature but its something i really use quite often. I have tried the Asus Zenfone 9, Xiaomi 12, both have inferior microphones. My samsung s10e now has a green screen on the OLED so I i need a replacement phone.
Is it possible to measure the recorded microphone quality of this phone? I have the Samsung s10e, also owned many samsungs in the past and found them to be superior to many other phones i have tried. I have not tried Sony. This is important for me because I record singing and also live music events. I know this is a very niche feature but its something i really use quite often. I have tried the Asus Zenfone 9, Xiaomi 12, both have inferior microphones. My samsung s10e now has a green screen on the OLED so I i need a replacement phone.
staticV3
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2019
- Messages
- 14,840
- Likes
- 25,939
DxOMark tests the recording quality of smartphones:
https://www.dxomark.com/smartphones/custom-ranking#/?criteriasChecked=0&criteriaScores={}&criteriaSubScores={%22audiorecording%22:%221%22}Their methodology and scoring system is unfortunately pretty obscure, but perhaps you can still get some value out of it.
Last edited:
So the new XPERIA 1 Mk 6 came out this week, and it looks like Sony claims that theres a new audio circuit that reduces crosstalk allegedly 50% better separation between L&R channels. Hoping it means the power output is better as well cause Amir's model seems to output almost nothing.
I'm strongly considering getting either the new XPERIA 1mk6 or the Asus ROG 8 if Amir is down to review it. Always been a big fan of Sony phones and the latest update seems to be pretty huge in the tech space.
I'm strongly considering getting either the new XPERIA 1mk6 or the Asus ROG 8 if Amir is down to review it. Always been a big fan of Sony phones and the latest update seems to be pretty huge in the tech space.
Basically do it backwards, Get a flat neutral speaker, connect it to your pc as a microphone (download a mic app), play the sweep into ur phone
How to Test Microphone Frequency Response | TSP (theseasonedpodcaster.com)
Jimster480
Major Contributor
Personally I have the Xperia 1 MK IV and I love it. If I want to power a big headphone I use my FiiO KA13 but otherwise the output from the headphone jack is enough for the aux input in a couple of my cars.... which is what I use the headphone jack for most of the time anyway. It is also good enough for talking on the phone with a pair of earbuds if I don't use a BT headset.
Personally the audio quality of the speakers on the phone beats any other phone I have heard by a good margin, this is especially true of anything in the midrange. Between that + Picture processing capabilities; the phone looks and sounds phenomenal. While I don't really watch movies on my phone; I do appreciate it with the content that I do consume on my phone here and there.
The battery life + charging setting to limit the charge to 80 or 90% is something I also really like. I limit mine to 80% and charge it once a day basically unless I have a super heavy use day.
Based on early review, it seems like the Mk6 also has one of the highest rated phone speakers on GSMarena based on LUFS output and response, granted you can get more gain if you cup your hands around the phone and it probably boosts the response as well. GSMArena's speaker measurements might not be perfect but they do have the largest database of phone speaker measurements. Very Few phones get to -24s in LUFS and above.
How they perform testing: GSMArena feature labs: The tests: Speaker test
They used to also measure headphone output, but they stopped doing it in recent years for whatever reason.
They also managed to get 40-50% more battery life out of the new mk6 despite having the same size battery. The new Variable rate LTPO display is really efficient and optimized compared to the old 4K display.
Jimster480
Major Contributor
I would say that the new display will be in every way worse. It has a much lower resolution overall which I think is part of the reason for the better battery life. Personally the 4K display is insane and there is no other phone with clarity like that when run in the right conditions. Xperia 5 had the lower resolution display, but now basically the 1 = 5 because they are both like the same resolution. Previously the 5 had the better battery life due to the lower resolution.
You might think that 4K on a phone is just insane, but in the cases where you can use side by side apps in portrait mode; it provides something that no other phone can do because it just has so much pixel realestate for the apps to have full detail and run side by side. Also I can get into my 4K desktop & 1440p laptop and remote control them without a problem of text & detail crush like on a lower resolution screen.
Honestly taking a look at the new phone just looks like they killed the Xperia 5 and went to a single worse device with a lower quality screen while keeping the price the same. Personally the Xperia 1 VI would be a downgrade vs my Xperia 1 IV.
It can still be a good phone I suppose if you don't care about the quality(resolution) of your screen and want to have an entry level type OLED screen.
Last edited:
Ken Tajalli
Major Contributor
I would have installed Neutron Player or USB audio player on it, set them up as upnp receivers and streamed to the player losslessly over WiFi.
These players would also bypass the Android OS and control the onboard DAC in a manner similar to exclusive mode. On my Huawei phone, with headphones attached, Neutron reports and can select, up to 32/192 on the onboard phone DAC.
They can also send hires to onboard LDAC transmitter.
These players would also bypass the Android OS and control the onboard DAC in a manner similar to exclusive mode. On my Huawei phone, with headphones attached, Neutron reports and can select, up to 32/192 on the onboard phone DAC.
They can also send hires to onboard LDAC transmitter.
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #359
Sure. Just start a conversation with me.
Jimster480
Major Contributor
Thanks. I will give this a shot even if I don't listen to that much music on my phone.
Similar threads
- Poll
