Password to Enter settings

[Smegel]

Sorry I’m not too lazy… I just went w Google’s AI which was the quick and dirty way to get the info… rather than hunt for the link back to Qualcomm. (Because I forgot the chip manufacturer at the time.)

As you can see… it exists. However you need both sides of the BT connection to support it otherwise it will fall back to the earlier version.

The biggest drawback is that it will have a delay. Not bad if you’re just listening to streaming music. Bad if you are using your stereo while on a call. Not only does the sound not sync to video, but you can get echoes where not going lossless will be better.

My MB20 has a physical switch that lets you choose for lower quality but less delay and Higher quality albeit slightly delayed.

For ‘high quality’ I have a USB dongle dac that does 768Hz@32bit depth and the Apple USB port can up sample to that bit rate.

[BorisM]

@Smegel

Ah but it does boris because the version of BT has to be able to support it.
Hence if you are not running BT 5.4 the codec isn’t supported.

You are wrong, as usual. It has (almost) nothing to do with BT version (well, BT 1.0 would not be able to handle it at all; BT 2 would be OK). Only with a proprietary vendor extension that they may implement where they see fit.

@Smegel

Below is the announcement from Qualcomm

Funny how it does not mention BT versions at all.

Having even a BT 6.9 device does not give you any lossless audio capabilities. Unless it happens to be a Qualcomm-based one, with this particular codec enabled. The only reason there is any correlation with BT 5.x versions is because QuIalcomm had released it after BT 5.x was released and they definitely aren’t going to backport it to older chips. They got new ones to sell, even though even a BT 2.0 connection has enough bandwidth to support it.

[Smegel]

Boris I suggest you actually pay a bit of attention and try to figure out why BT version is important.

[BorisM]

Because you have no idea what “BT version” means and how BT works. It’s important in that sense.

[Smegel]

Wow. It would be nice if you and Bonte thought before you posted.

First it was CAT 7 patch cables w RJ45 connectors. ( I even posted links to Sku’s for actual products)

Then its Bonte w his no such thing as APTX Lossless… but then I had to pull up the Qualcomm link discussing that.

Now this?

Boris please quit while you’re behind.

If you can’t figure out the relationship between BT and the codec, then there’s really no help for you.

[BorisM]

@Smegel

First it was CAT 7 patch cables w RJ45 connectors. ( I even posted links to Sku’s for actual products)

You believe you did, because you do not have any idea what any of those fancy words (like “standards”) mean. I can make uyp a SKU (and some glowing reviews from Hans Butthuisen and John Dumbo) for a perpetual lotion machine, but it will be just as real as your “Cat 7” cables.

@Smegel

Then its Bonte w his no such thing as APTX Lossless… but then I had to pull up the Qualcomm link discussing that.

That’s not what was said, but of course you would not realise it.

@Smegel

Boris please quit while you’re behind.

The Earth is round, so you can assume that all you want. And yes, this will go right over your head, too.

@Smegel

If you can’t figure out the relationship between BT and the codec

If only you knew what a codec is… And how BT works.

Alas for you, there is no relationship between BT version and a possibility of lossless BT audio transmission. No currently existing version of BT guarantees you that.

Not that anyone would expect someone who thinks that REL makes subwoofers, or iFooFoo sells anything but AliExpress junk repackaged in a fancy case, would have any clue how BT Audio works.

[Bonte]

@Smegel

As you can see… it exists. However you need both sides of the BT connection to support it otherwise it will fall back to the earlier version

That’s exactly what @BorisM wrote.

I guess I forgot to include the Qualcomm link.

[Smegel]

Yeah but I mentioned it in early posts.
It is actually something that should have been obvious.

Now the other thing… BT 4 vs BT 5 you go from 1Mb/s to 2 Mb/s if memory serves. w BT 5.4 there are some extra goodies but I don’t believe the bandwidth improves, but maybe the reliability and connections improve which are also important.

People don’t realize just how noisy that airspace can get.
I have an older pair of BT IEMs that work great while sitting in my office… but the minute I go out on to the street walking my dog… they keep cutting in and out when there’s a lot of road traffic.

[Smegel]

As to the Qualcomm link…
your post was to question that there was no APTX Lossless codec and that there was only HD.

My point that was lost on Boris and to you… that you can achieve lossess audio w the latest BT release.

Now what I didn’t say was that if Rose were to upgrade the BT dongle to allow for split Wi-Fi and BT dongles you could get a BT 5.4 dongle and then you’d have to include their device drivers.
Now I’m assuming that the device driver would include the APTX Lossless codecs along with the other codecs. Again, that’s an assumption on my part.

And another assumption is that you could use a form of PnP to dynamically link in the correct drivers based on what’s plugged into the USB Port so you wouldn’t be limited to a specific device.

I don’t do Android but I’m going to assume that BT and Wi-Fi would be services and the device drivers loaded and the service restarted independent of the entire kernel. (Now watch Boris jump in w something silly.)

[BorisM]

@Smegel

BT 4 vs BT 5 you go from 1Mb/s to 2 Mb/s if memory serves.

It doesn’t, as usual. Couldn’t you at least look at Wiki or something before posting even more nonsense? Bluetooth went to 2Mb/s+ at version 2.0. But nobody would ever accuse Smegmel Der Schwul of of having ever said something even remotely accurate.

@Smegel

My point that was lost on Boris and to you…

That’s because, just like anything else you had ever said here, your “point” is BS.

@Smegel

you can achieve lossess audio w the latest BT release.

Nope. Sorry if it is too complicated a concept for you (just like anything more complex than asking your mom for some toys) bout you can not achieve lossless (CD quality) audio with “the latest BT release.” You can achieve it with a proprietary Qualcomm stack on both ends of the connection. If one could license or reverse-engineer the AptX Lossless codec (or develop a comparable one) you could easily do it with BT2.0.

@Smegel

you could get a BT 5.4 dongle and then you’d have to include their device drivers.
Now I’m assuming that the device driver would include the APTX Lossless codecs along with the other codecs. Again, that’s an assumption on my part.

You really should stick to talking about… which diapers you prefer or something. Not technical matters you know nothing about.

@Smegel

Now watch Boris jump in w something silly.

Meh. You would not know a computer from a hole in the ground, even if one (a mainframe, preferably) fell on your head.

[Smegel]

Boris I suggest you post some links to back up your comment.

[ROSEHAN]

Dear HiFi Rose users

First of all, regardless of when the Rose product was purchased, the PIN code requirement is applied through a firmware update. Therefore, the PIN code must be entered no matter when the device was bought.

We will once again confirm with the certification authority whether the PIN code feature must be strictly enforced, and we are considering a solution that would allow users to turn the PIN code function on or off if they wish.
However, there is a possibility that the certification authority may also reject this approach.

Thank you

[BorisM]

@Smegel

oris I suggest you post some links to back up your comment.

For intelligent peop;le Bluetooth® Technology Website

For feeble-minded like you, Bluetooth - Wikipedia would do.

[Bonte]

@BorisM

Smegmel Der Schwul…

@BorisM

For feeble-minded like you…

@Smegel

Now watch Boris jump in w something silly.

Man, you guys have no idea how much I love you for this! The chat is really very informative and you can even have a chuckle or two along the way.

I love a wealth of knowledge with a touch of fun.

Please keep it up…