Tech wizards apply here please.....

[Chris_D]

I do like Sennheiser earphones, good choice

I'm also a fan. Just part of my collection of 90's HD-range Senns..
IMG_20210906_102914_1.jpg

Wired is always best I think, I'm just wondering if the basic adapter supplied is the weak link here, although it sounds pretty good to be fair.

Wired most definitely IS your best option when it comes to sound quality.
However, I'm keen to find out how good the bluetooth 'APTX Lossless' codec is. If it's anywhere near as good as industry claims then it may well be a worthy contender for wired solutions when it comes to hi-resolution music playback.

Will it matter what what machine you use if wireless turns out to be that good..? Eg, a cheap crap tablet V a very good quality one or are the differences in price down to better quality parts internally and capability yet they won't have any effect on music quality..?

It's literally too vast and subjective a discussion to get into John.
In essence, bluetooth wireless signal transfer has always been (up until the advent of the proposed APTX lossless codec) a compromise to SQ as the signal is compressed and then decompressed using algorithms that detrimentally affect the SQ.
The other main part of the SQ equation is the DAC and amplifier stages and how they are implemented which can vary wildly from device to device.
To give you an example of my own portable setup, I use USBAudioPLayerPro on an Android phone to play 24bit FLAC files. The signal is transferred to an external Fiio headphone amp and sometimes I will use an external Chord Mojo dac/amp depending on which headphones I'm using.
Overkill, maybe. But if you care about SQ and want to hear what was recorded in the studio, rather than some 3rd party sound-engineers' perception of how your music should sound then this will always be a better solution.

With APTX lossless as well as all of the other Bluetooth codecs you are still reliant on listening to a 'version' of the music that the software developers have deemed viable and within the constraints of what works from a wireless/technical perspective via compression, decompression, losses. i.e. a compromise to the original sound.
I'm curious about whether APTX 'Lossless' will really be...lossless.

IMG_20200813_140514.jpg (105.7 KiB) Viewed 200 times

[john-e89]

I'm also a fan. Just part of my collection of 90's HD-range Senns..
IMG_20210906_102914_1.jpg


Wired most definitely IS your best option when it comes to sound quality.
However, I'm keen to find out how good the bluetooth 'APTX Lossless' codec is. If it's anywhere near as good as industry claims then it may well be a worthy contender for wired solutions when it comes to hi-resolution music playback.

Will it matter what what machine you use if wireless turns out to be that good..? Eg, a cheap crap tablet V a very good quality one or are the differences in price down to better quality parts internally and capability yet they won't have any effect on music quality..?

It's literally too vast and subjective a discussion to get into John.
In essence, bluetooth wireless signal transfer has always been (up until the advent of the proposed APTX lossless codec) a compromise to SQ as the signal is compressed and then decompressed using algorithms that detrimentally affect the SQ.
The other main part of the SQ equation is the DAC and amplifier stages and how they are implemented which can vary wildly from device to device.
To give you an example of my own portable setup, I use USBAudioPLayerPro on an Android phone to play 24bit FLAC files. The signal is transferred to an external Fiio headphone amp and sometimes I will use an external Chord Mojo dac/amp depending on which headphones I'm using.
Overkill, maybe. But if you care about SQ and want to hear what was recorded in the studio, rather than some 3rd party sound-engineers' perception of how your music should sound then this will always be a better solution.

With APTX lossless as well as all of the other Bluetooth codecs you are still reliant on listening to a 'version' of the music that the software developers have deemed viable and within the constraints of what works from a wireless/technical perspective via compression, decompression, losses. i.e. a compromise to the original sound.
I'm curious about whether APTX 'Lossless' will really be...lossless.
IMG_20200813_140514.jpg

That makes perfect sense, I'd love to hear your set up, I'm a fan of SQ, I imagine I'd be b!own away. The wireless lossless sounds very interesting, I'd invest if it's as good as it sounds although as you say it'll always be an interpretation but that'll never change I guess.

[Stevo1987]

It all depends depends how good ones ears are. I think mine were made by Alan Sugar's old company.

[sars]

I’m no audiophile, but I would say my Momentum TW2’s are certainly on a sound par with my wired Shure 425’s and my Momentum 3’s are just amazing, sound quality is exceptional. As for different devices, I only listen to audiobooks or music, rarely video, for music I struggle to tell the difference between Apple lossless and Spotify at the highest sample rate on either of the wireless Sennheiser’s which are both Bluetooth 5.

[john-e89]

I’m no audiophile, but I would say my Momentum TW2’s are certainly on a sound par with my wired Shure 425’s and my Momentum 3’s are just amazing, sound quality is exceptional. As for different devices, I only listen to audiobooks or music, rarely video, for music I struggle to tell the difference between Apple lossless and Spotify at the highest sample rate on either of the wireless Sennheiser’s which are both Bluetooth 5.

Interesting view from experience Sars.

[dhobbs]

Have you tried seeing if there are any firmware driver updates for the Bluetooth module on the laptop?

I have Sony wireless earbuds for running and I have configured them for connection rather than performance but that requires their Headphones app to be installed. Not a big fan of Sony products now, battery life is terrible.

Do you experience this issue with other Bluetooth headphones?