47 ms·
It's hardly data, it's personal experience. Seems the main thrust of your argument is that if I spend a load of money I'll get better results. Well Duh
by rusk 9y ago
It's hardly data, it's personal experience. Seems the main thrust of your argument is that if I spend a load of money I'll get better results. Well Duh
- emodendroket 9y agoWell, no, the main thrust of my argument is that if the primary concern is data fidelity then sticking with a headphone jack seems silly.
- rusk 9y agoBut the thrust of my argument was that bluetooth was inferior to a wired connection (and probably inferior to analogue from the jack itself). As other commentators have helpfully pointed out this is due to the poor codecs in use with bluetooth. So there's plenty of extraneous contributed "data" that supports my claim.
- emodendroket 9y agoBut a wired connection is hardly unsupported, regardless. The funny connector seems like a nonissue for a car.
- rusk 9y agoThere you are putting words in my mouth. I never made any remark about the connector. It's almost like you came to this discussion with a point to disprove already in mind.
- emodendroket 9y agoI figured "the aux connection has better fidelity than Bluetooth" was meant to imply "they should keep the headphone jack."
- rusk 9y agonope it was just meant to imply that the sound quality was better (-:
- emodendroket 9y agoAlright, fair enough. More directly to your point, though, I've never experienced problems like one speaker cutting out because the wire is too old with digital connections. I really like digital better because it's mostly either working or not.
- rusk 9y agoOh but ... My big gripe with digital vs analogue is it's all or nothing. When digital degrades its unbearable to listen to. Analogue handles age more gracefully.
- emodendroket 9y agoI guess I don't like being slowly driven insane wondering if some degradation is just in my head, jiggling the wire, etc. Maybe just me.