3 ms·
> the wireless Bluetooth, and what it does to audio, It should do about the same as the "oxygen-free copper" cables, perhaps slower - moving bits from A to B.
by B1FF_PSUVM 3y ago
> the wireless Bluetooth, and what it does to audio,
It should do about the same as the "oxygen-free copper" cables, perhaps slower - moving bits from A to B.
Is there any evidence otherwise?
- 0x457 3y agoWell, BT introduces additional delay and jitter. It's fine for listening to music because you can "cache" segments. That's totally not going to working real-time audio. Apple doesn't support aptX HD, aptX Lossless, LDAC for Bluetooth devices. IIRC they use AAC 256 kbps for their wireless audio. Once again, totally fine for listening Spotify and apply music, but I imagine suboptimal for DAW.
- Ancapistani 3y agoI had a brief foray into using a set of Bluetooth headphones for PC gaming. It was “brief” because the delay was enough that it got me killed in games regularly enough that it was just intolerable.
- 0x457 3y agoYeah, for gaming you need headphones that use some proprietary protocol, unfortunately. BT just doesn't work well. It's not as noticeable for people who never talked on a real landline phone (i.e. not VoIP) because everything else has noticeable and often non-constant latency.
- recursive 3y agoEvidence? It uses lossy audio codecs. Some are good, and some are less good, but they're all lossy. The quality loss happens before the bits hit the radio. That part is fine, as you note. "Oxygen-free copper", regardless of whether it's beneficial, is generally used for analog signals, which isn't moving bits at all. Bluetooth also introduces latency. It might be ok for mixing, but it's completely unusable for recording applications.