Bluetooh Codec Frequency Response Test | aptX HD aptX SBC AAC How They Compare with WONDOM BRB3

Подписаться 5 тыс.

Просмотров 15 тыс.

50% 1

We know that Bluetooth maximum bitrate is 2Mbps and it can only reach 1 or 2Mbps in perfect condition. The bitrate of an audio file in 48kHz and 24bit is 2.304Mbps before packing. Therefore, in order for stable connection and audio transmission, when using Bluetooth to wirelessly transmit audio, audio signal needs to be compressed by a certain algorithm. That’s so called codec. There are many different Bluetooth codec because of the continuous development of technology and unstop pursue of high audio quality, such as SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD, LDAC and so on. Different codec would have impacts mainly on audio quality as frequency response, THD, and audio transmission as stability, range and latency.
In this video, we use WONDOM AA-AB41136 Bluetooth receiver board to test the impact of different codecs in frequency response. The involved codec is SBC, AAC, aptX and aptX HD.
If you’re interested in this video, please leave us a like or a comment. We will upload more videos on comparisons among Bluetooth codecs (SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD, aptX LL, LDAC) according to your feedbacks.
We are going to provide the final comparison chart when all tests done, include Delay, THD and transmission quality, leave us your comments and let us know what you would like to know, and let us check the conclusion together! Cheers!
Where you can buy this product :
Online Shop : store.sure-ele...
Aliexpress Shop : s.click.aliexp...
Amazon Shop : www.amazon.com...
eBay Shop : www.ebay.com/s...

Опубликовано:

10 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 29

@AS-gp9kg 2 года назад

In conclusion we can say there is subtle audible differences. Most of these differences will not be heard without a reference level system. The differences above 20khz are inaudible as there is little to no music in that spectrum. Anything above say 12khz is likely 2nd and 3rd harmonic distortions, unless we’re considering electronic music. A greater emphasis on data below 20khz would have been helpful.

@christianholm-olesen1199 Год назад

It would even be inaudible on a reference system. Most differences were under 12,5 Hz and over 20 kHz, which are out of the audible spectrum. In the medium range the differences were within +/-0,5 db, which is also inaudible. 1 db is defined as the minimum audible difference.

@arminosaeure29 11 месяцев назад

Thumbs up for the work, but i think there are some things wrong/incomplet: With a pure sine wave this is not exactly a fair test. With most of codecs adjusting for the complexity of the music for given bandwith. A test with Pink noise and then messing at specific frequencies would have been a more music like scenario. Also outputlevel is not the only thing. What about compression artifacts, harmonics etc. a sonogram before and after would have been nice.

@_bulat 5 месяцев назад

Thank You

@MuhammadRifana 2 года назад

In conclusion, audiophile people, cannot hear good audio over their expensive audio system ( at this point TWS with aptx or even snapdragon sound 24 bit or something). They buy placebo effect. Sbc or AAC is fine.

@1DanMcLain 7 месяцев назад

What you need to look at is not really the dB at each frequency, but the shape of the sine wave at those same frequency's... dB at each frequency is important for speakers/headphones, but not really a problem for the transmission side of the table. I have a feeling the sine wave will look much different with the low end codecs.. and more conversions, rather than a sine wave you may start to see a simulated sine wave, and square waves, etc much like a cheap inverter.. it outputs a simulated sine wave which is essentially a bunch of square waves which is not soft, but notchy.. much like BT audio can sound (notchy/scratchy). Then, if there is a bunch of frequency's all bouncing around at the same time, how does this impact the individual frequency's? This last part may be hard to measure. The shape of the sine wave is what will determine the quality of the audio.. not simply the dB of the frequency. I also ran this dB vs. frequency test myself yesterday and saw no real difference between uncompressed wav file, and low quality .mp3, vs. FLAC file, then that made me realize there is more to the story... like the shape of the sine wave. Since, if you compress data in a sine wave... it will definitely not be as "smooth", or true to the original shape. I plan on doing this later today.

@FlowwUP 3 года назад

A simple conclusion from all the facts and differences at the end is Missing. But nice Video.

@Clem_dow 5 месяцев назад

Is there any way to improve the latency used with AAC?

@DoubleMonoLR 10 месяцев назад

All the methods use compressed signals, feeding a sine wave is far from a music signal. I'd imagine practically any compression can handle that with minimal, if any, loss. Simply playing a high quality source, and comparing the recorded waveforms after being transmitted via the different methods would seem more useful, at least in addition to the results here. Albeit it may be difficult to visualize the audible differences.

@christianholm-olesen1199 Год назад

You stated that the need for codecs and compression is due to the bluetooth transfer rate, which is limited to 2 Mbps, and that 2x (24 bit 48 kHz) would require >2,3 Mbps. Why don't we just use 16 bit 44,1 kHz uncompressed? 2x16x44,1=1,411 Mbps. Well under 2 Mbps. Or even 2x16x48=1,536 Mbps? I have always believed in keeping the signal path as short as possible, to get the signal as pure and original as possible. That is actually what HIgh-FIdelity stands for! Every time you convert or compress, you will loose a little bit, even though it is inaudible or not. Why make it more complex than it has to be? Am I missing something?

@DoubleMonoLR 10 месяцев назад

As shown in the video, it needs to be compressed in order to get a stable connection, along with presumably error correction etc. If it *always* had a stable 2Mbps signal, I expect it would be done, but as it is bluetooth can be flaky keeping any kind of signal already. Bluetooth also needs to allow for other things such as a mic, though I think it might switch modes in that case.

@discy12345 3 месяца назад

You're missing impact of distance on connection-speed

@angelyoyoyo 24 дня назад

How about ldac??

@djrutherford3926 2 года назад

Is it true that when using an Android phone the SBC codec is supposed to sound better than using AAC?

@WONDOMAudio 2 года назад

My personal opinion is AAC will be better than SBC, and if we compare aptX to SBC, I think it is not too difficult to feel the difference, not only frequency response effect the sound quality, so those codecs will be better than SBC. But for most occasions, like using a sound bar or some non hifi system, it is very hard to tell the difference.

@djrutherford3926 2 года назад

@@WONDOMAudio I also wanted to point out that you have a typo in your title for this video. In case you wanted to know.

@Adi7x Год назад

@@WONDOMAudio most people cant hear anything obove 16, 17 khz. So what are the differences between codecs?

@federalbureauofinvestigation4 Год назад

@@Adi7x detail, you can actually tell the difference between aac and sbc. But anything higher than aac feels pretty similar.

@DoubleMonoLR 10 месяцев назад

@@WONDOMAudio I'd imagine headphones/earphones would be one of the main applications, it's the only scenario that has a big benefit from wireless anyway. There's a lot of good headphones & earphones, though it seems like even many good models don't bother with the better codecs. Often they kind of suck, I've got some well reviewed Jabra bluetooth earphones, and they're easily beaten(at least to my ears) by some good Chinese $10 wired earphones (Uiisii HM7). It's entirely possible that big brands are just terrible at making earphones though, their wired models nowhere near compete with much cheaper Chinese models in relation to price.

@agnesloveshachi8555 3 года назад

Hi nice video

@skyhero1888 6 месяцев назад

AAC on a Apple device is million times better than on android.

@bluelines1792 Год назад

It is now proven converting 44khz to 48khz is bad but do android phones do that?

@musafirkunjon1702 7 месяцев назад

Some phones. Best sound effects. High level

@emjay9733 7 месяцев назад

Looks like the differences are negligible to the human ear.

@batfox-jewelry 3 года назад

I bought a dindinmodern speaker last time. Although not perfect, it is considered the best among products at the same price.....

@vijayadithya61 3 года назад

have some direct supply to India.. Or pls let me know how to buy your products

@fiveangle 2 года назад

"We will focus on frequency response in this video…" then proceeds to present a bunch of pseudoscience without any reference to harmonic distortion. What's next ? "How to perform a fast-fourier analysis by only chewing bubblegum!" ? SKIP

@viecthatnguoithat4290 2 года назад

Sure bluetooth brb3 qcc3034 chỉ nhận codec sbc. Từ chối codec aptx @@

@natalerizzo9379 11 месяцев назад

Le risposte in frequenza non servono a niente senza misure delle distorsioni armoniche e di intermodulazione...è li che casca l'asino....😂 In più la musica non è una sequenza di pure onde sinusoidali ....amico mio non hai dimostrato un bel niente...