XDUOO XQ50 PRO 2 Bluetooth Receiver Review

[Chr1]

I am still unsure at what point jitter becomes audible. Generally stick to USB output to my DACs as I am aware that modern asynchronous implementations are pretty much free from jitter tho.

 

[amirm]

At those levels it likely is not audible.

 

[pablolie]

To me it seems like a waste of $80. The only thing it does ok is pass digital data transparently. Wow. Just spend another few $ on something with a bit more versatility?

 

[amirm]

Find me an adapter with this type of display for less.

 

[TonyJZX]

To me it seems like a waste of $80. The only thing it does ok is pass digital data transparently. Wow. Just spend another few $ on something with a bit more versatility?

i get that but this company is very clear on what it does and what it doesnt so i expect intelligent folks like yourself will make an informed choice

to me, yes, buy a dac with good BT already inside but for diagnosticians here, they need a real good analytical display and this one of the few

xduoo to their credit also make it known the processer inside is the venerable ESS 9018K2M and it DOES have type-c dac capability... doesnt say what the rating is but since it runs a CS8406 which is limited to 24/192...

xduoo has a reputation for making some wacky but useful stuff... i want to buy more of their stuff but their catalog stretches the bound of what a normal person would find useful

 

[pablolie]

i get that but this company is very clear on what it does and what it doesnt so i expect intelligent folks like yourself will make an informed choice

to me, yes, buy a dac with good BT already inside but for diagnosticians here, they need a real good analytical display and this one of the few

xduoo to their credit also make it known the processer inside is the venerable ESS 9018K2M and it DOES have type-c dac capability... doesnt say what the rating is but since it runs a CS8406 which is limited to 24/192...

xduoo has a reputation for making some wacky but useful stuff... i want to buy more of their stuff but their catalog stretches the bound of what a normal person would find useful

I acknowledge and accept your point. I was narrow minded for my own use case.

 

[Chr1]

To give Xduoo credit: I think that displays and GUIs are an area that could often be improved on with lots of equipment. One of the main reasons I have stuck with Topping DACs over, say SMSL is that I want to see the volume level displayed rather than the sample rate. Why not make it an option? It is little details like this that can make or break it for me personally. Especially as we are now so spoilt for choice.

 

[pablolie]

To give Xduoo credit: I think that displays and GUIs are an area that could often be improved on with lots of equipment. One of the main reasons I have stuck with Topping DACs over, say SMSL is that I want to see the volume level displayed rather than the sample rate. Why not make it an option. It is little details like this that can make or break it for me personally. Especially as we are now so spoilt for choice.

I believe we are firmly in an era of experimental feature integration at many levels. The SQ equation is pretty much addressed unless you have vampire ears. ‍

The next few years will be very telling about whats optimal to integrate where and how.

In my industry, we have now what is called abstraction models that are standardized. And as a controller, you ask for device capabilities via standard protocols... and then use them in an optimal way.

Audio systems scream for that degree of standardization.

 

[pseudoid]

Audio systems scream for that degree of standardization.

I think much headway has been achieved in standardization of audio (digital) interfaces... since the days of 'proprietary format' wars, which we have already endured!
[RedBook, anyone?]
Before Napster, there was mp3 and both started neutralizing the playing-field for 'open' standards. Early help also came from Apple iTunes folks for artist royalties, to the consternation of media moguls.
[aka "Hooligan B*st*rds and their Shenanigans"]
WiFi, USB, BT, AoIP, AoE, eARC may not all be royalty-free but they sure have become standardized enough to achieve and/or exceed CD quality.
[Yey!]

 

[aatoma]

View attachment 337403

Thank you for your thorough review @amirm, I use this little guy as a bluetooth adapter in my car and I'm pretty happy with sound quality. I have one question, though: do you know what 'Custom bluetooth name' means? Is there any way to change the name this device broadcasts when pairing?

 

[amirm]

do you know what 'Custom bluetooth name' means? Is there any way to change the name this device broadcasts when pairing?

Oh, mine identified as the model number of the device. Maybe there are different revisions of the firmware. Or an issue with the phone.

 

[Hipster Doofus]

Thanks for not forgetting that many of us forget what each number does and why from one review to the next. Your side comments on how and why to use a product is invaluable ( implementation ) . Little things like “best” or “don’t forget you can use your own DAC” really hit home.

 

[lewdish]

Id like to see a test where the codecs are compared SBC/AAC/LDAC/APTX and see if the sinad does improve significantly like MiniDSP shows in their AP measurments

 

[amirm]

See https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...c3-review-bluetooth-receiver-bt-codecs.23740/

 

[Lemanss]

Find me an adapter with this type of display for less.

On the audiophonics site (I'm French) there are two:

Récepteur Bluetooth 5.0 CSR8675 aptX HD LDAC
49,90 €


FIIO BR13 Récepteur Bluetooth 5.1 QCC5125 DAC ES9018K2M aptX-HD LDAC 24bit / 96kHz
69,00 €

I am interested in this type of device connected before a MINI-DSP with DIRAC which itself is connected before my DAC. I can't use the Bluetooth input on my DAC.

 

[Lemanss]

I acknowledge and accept your point. I was narrow minded for my own use case.

I am interested in this type of device connected before a MINI-DSP with DIRAC which itself is connected before my DAC. I can't use the Bluetooth input on my DAC.

 

[raif71]

I have to use this opportunity to say that xDuoo need better marketing people. What kind of name is “xDuoo?” If the company wants to appeal to consumers in countries that use the Latin alphabet, they need to try harder. Even “xDuo” would be better—if there was something related to the number two in their products. But “Duoo?” Come on. Do a little basic research to come up with an appealing name rather than one that resembles doo doo.

oh schiit ... perhaps it's the chinese counterpart to the famous american audio company

 

[Tremolo]

On the audiophonics site (I'm French) there are two:

Récepteur Bluetooth 5.0 CSR8675 aptX HD LDAC
49,90 €

No screen at all

FIIO BR13 Récepteur Bluetooth 5.1 QCC5125 DAC ES9018K2M aptX-HD LDAC 24bit / 96kHz
69,00 €

It looks like the screen displays only volume level and few informations. The peq functions are interesting but if you have dirac not so much.

 

[Lemanss]

No screen at all

It looks like the screen displays only volume level and few informations. The peq functions are interesting but if you have dirac not so much.

What interests me is the sound quality which I hope is excellent. The only one certified in this sense by Amirm at the moment is the IFI ZEN and the Topping BC3.
.

 

[TonyJZX]

i still havent seen a dac unit in this price that has such an informative and functional screen

to me the xduoo name doesnt bother me... its a niche little chinese company serving mainly the mainland chinese audience with very peculiar products

i think their bread and butter is the XD05 line headphone amp dacs

to me companies who are building yet another TPA3255 device is pretty boring

if you're building weird ass stuff like xduoo then you have my attention