[Ithilstone]

So you also have a R2R2000?

yeap black

 

[Hanesu]

On the iOS or Android note - yes it's the same DAC but I still hear sonic differences between audio apps on the same device for example, so it's still possible to have sound differences between devices.

Sorry, I am having a bit of problems to follow you, because in the same sentence you wrote "the same device" and then the "differences between devices"?
Let me see if I got you right: So you mean you connect the same DAC-Amp (let`s say a Chord Mojo) to an iPhone and then to an Android phone and you will get "sonic differences" in sq out of the same Mojo by playing the same type of audio file from Android and iOS??? How should this be possible? Should be basically the same digital data that get converted by the DAC to an analog signal, no matter whether it Android or iOS?

For Bluetooth or LDAC, I used to always grab my little Shanling M0 rather than the iPhone.

This sentence I also don`t understand. What do you mean by "bluetooth OR LDAC"? LDAC IS a type of bluetooth?
And of course you can`t grab the iPhone for it, because iPhone does not offer it? And the fact that LDAC sounds better than regular BT has nothing to do with Android or iOS (your original statement was "Android sounds better than iOS), it`s just because it is the better BT codec?

 

[Hanesu]

isn't lhdc software codec? my phone runs android 10 - not sure what lhdc version it supposed to work with but it works and if it is a software thinkgy then it would be easily implemented and should be no reason to have lhdc 1 and 2 - mind you it is not the newest phone.
and thinking about it isnt LDAC software codec as well? I know a lot of phones had it added with android 8 when there was no LDAC hardware

Yes, all are software codecs - but still it is not possible to implement for Hifiman on the r2r2000, as it seems. Actually the Hifiman support has told me themselves, after I asked them (I wrote about it earlier in this thread).
They said it is impossible to implement LDAC on the r2r2000, even from the hardware side (for whatever reason).
And that LHDC1 and LHDC2 are not compatible and r2r2000 can and will only be able to receive and play LHDC1.
So in this case your phone must transmit LHCD1.

 

[dill3000]

Yes the same FLAC can sound different on different audiophile apps on the same device. Let simplify it. I'm going to give you an example on my Mac computer. If I connect a Chord Mojo and play the same FLAC file using two different audiophile applications you would get sonic differences when playing the music - I've done various tests over the years.

So if I use Amarra Luxe and Audirvana as the examples. I have even done tests with different versions of the same app in the past, example Amarra version 3 and Amarra version 4 sounded different when doing tests. Both apps not up sampling or anything.

I have done very similar tests with the same outcome with audiophile apps connected to the same iPhone, in fact I have done some of these tests with a Mojo.

I am fully aware that LDAC is Bluetooth, when I said " Bluetooth or LDAC" I meant standard Bluetooth as the "Bluetooth" and "LDAC" as LDAC

 

[Hanesu]

Yes the same FLAC can sound different on different audiophile apps on the same device. Let simplify it. I'm going to give you an example on my Mac computer. If I connect a Chord Mojo and play the same FLAC file using two different audiophile applications you would get sonic differences when playing the music - I've done various tests over the years.

Hmmm, of course me, I can neither disproof nor verify what you say - but I have my doubts there are "sonic differences" and they could always be verified in a scientific blind test. Another even more important question is, even if the differences exist like you describe, how do you know they are really linked to the OS system? I think they are rather linked to the programming / digital processing of the used apps! Btw., now you are talking about two apps on the same OS!
By comparing two audiophile apps, you must first make sure they do not use any type of DSP to change the sound! I have no doubts many companies use digital tricks to let their apps sound better. But again, this has nothing to do with iPhone vs Android!

Anyway, this is just my opinion and you have yours - which is fine!

I am fully aware that LDAC is Bluetooth, when I said " Bluetooth or LDAC" I meant standard Bluetooth as the "Bluetooth" and "LDAC" as LDAC

I see! Thanks for making it clear!

 

[dill3000]

I guess you'd have to do listening test sessions on the same equipment to come to your own conclusions. You should try for yourself one day. When I think about the Amarra version 3 and Amarra version 4 tests that I did just after updating to Amarra 4. I recall one of Amarra's selling points for Amarra 4 is that it sonically sounded better than version 3.

I didn't want to talk about VS with operating systems. I'm just talking about my experiences with the two devices. Saying that the operating systems still could have something to do with sound.

I think hardware has something to do with it also in terms of sound quality. I also recall doing lots of tests with my upgraded iPhone's in the past. One example is the original iPhone to the iPhone 3GS. I found the original iPhone had more power in terms of sound volume and had better sound quality. I think the DAC was better. It had the same operating system. I just felt slowly but surely Apple neglected sonics over other things over time. My iPod Video still is my favorite sounding iPod/iPhone device.

 

[Hanesu]

I didn't want to talk about VS with operating systems.

What is "VS"?

I think hardware has something to do with it also in terms of sound quality. I also recall doing lots of tests with my upgraded iPhone's in the past. One example is the original iPhone to the iPhone 3GS. I found the original iPhone had more power in terms of sound volume and had better sound quality. I think the DAC was better. It had the same operating system. I just felt slowly but surely Apple neglected sonics over other things over time. My iPod Video still is my favorite sounding iPod/iPhone device.

Of course I am 100% with you that the hardware of phones is the most important factor for sound quality if you use them through 3,5 headphone output! Apple (and other makers) have used different DAC chips and amp sections over time which obviously lead to sound (quality) differences!
But in our days (phones have no 3,5 output and no internal DAC anymore) it`s not the phone but the dongle, an external amp or the BT headphones, that include the DAC, right?

I guess you'd have to do listening test sessions on the same equipment to come to your own conclusions. You should try for yourself one day. When I think about the Amarra version 3 and Amarra version 4 tests that I did just after updating to Amarra 4. I recall one of Amarra's selling points for Amarra 4 is that it sonically sounded better than version 3.

Yes, I believe you, but that most likely has to do with DSP that the software is using to polish the sound! Not with the operating system! If the software is programmed in the same way, it should sound the same on any operating system! That was my point!

Again: The only thing I wouldn`t agree on is that an Android phone generally sounds better than an iPhone if you connect it to an external DAC!

 

[Brooko]

Thankfully a voice of reason Hanesu - and George, you should know better.

1. iPhones have always had quality dacs in their iPhones. Why - because its the same tech as their iPods, and they were built for music. They measure flat with low distortion. Most of the time they are significantly better than many Android devices.
2. The problem with the iPhone is that it typically has a weak amp (and again - it shares this with the majority of Smart Phones in general). If someone is trying to drive a headphone which needs more voltage or current than the iPhone can deliver, of course it'll sound below par. So will an Android with similar specs.
3. When you're talking about SBC as a poor quality codec - its actually not. Most people just like to believe they can tell lossless from lossy (so many golden ears out there!). But when you're talking about bit-rates above about 256Kbps, most music is generally transparent. Sure - you'll get the odd track which won't be, and some codecs are better than others - but as far as Bluetooth goes, SBC is just fine for music (it suffers latency issues for video). It'll also handle up to 320 kbps / 44.1 files. More often its the quality of the bluetooth transmitter and not the codec which causes issues.
4. https://www.rtings.com/headphones/learn/sbc-aptx-which-bluetooth-codec-is-the-best
   Link is for comparison between SBC and aptX. Follow the actual measurements - there's a comparison of audio in that link too. Prepare to be surprised.
5. As far as pairing an R2R2K (black) with an iPhone via Bluetooth - it sounds pretty darn good. Fantastic pairing. I have no issues.
6. I haven't tried pairing the R2R2K on a wired connection (yet) to the iPhone, but if I can get a cable I will. Personally I don't see the point as the Bluetooth connection sounds great. Anyway - if you are going digital via cable, barring any jiggery-pokery via DSP (and Apple doesn't use any), then the signal will be the same. Its a DIGITAL signal. And my iPhone 11 is perfectly capable of outputting high-res over its lightning port (including DSD).

 

[Ithilstone]

Yes, all are software codecs - but still it is not possible to implement for Hifiman on the r2r2000, as it seems. Actually the Hifiman support has told me themselves, after I asked them (I wrote about it earlier in this thread).
They said it is impossible to implement LDAC on the r2r2000, even from the hardware side (for whatever reason).
And that LHDC1 and LHDC2 are not compatible and r2r2000 can and will only be able to receive and play LHDC1.
So in this case your phone must transmit LHCD1.

I have to believe you as i never got too deep into that topic as I was always interested in over usb connection to mobile - and just tested BT to check if it is working.
BTW Brooko is saying that CONNECTING SBC r2r + iphone sounds fantastic - and I have to believe him as well as far as iphone goes - my Moto 5g+ was sounding horrible over SBC to r2r on all songs - so conclusion is that iphone is doing something different there - i will late check how r2r sounds connected to oneplus over non hifiman app connectoin - i believe it will be limited to SBC only and will report back

 

[Hanesu]

Thankfully a voice of reason Hanesu - and George, you should know better.

1. iPhones have always had quality dacs in their iPhones. Why - because its the same tech as their iPods, and they were built for music. They measure flat with low distortion. Most of the time they are significantly better than many Android devices.
2. The problem with the iPhone is that it typically has a weak amp (and again - it shares this with the majority of Smart Phones in general). If someone is trying to drive a headphone which needs more voltage or current than the iPhone can deliver, of course it'll sound below par. So will an Android with similar specs.
3. When you're talking about SBC as a poor quality codec - its actually not. Most people just like to believe they can tell lossless from lossy (so many golden ears out there!). But when you're talking about bit-rates above about 256Kbps, most music is generally transparent. Sure - you'll get the odd track which won't be, and some codecs are better than others - but as far as Bluetooth goes, SBC is just fine for music (it suffers latency issues for video). It'll also handle up to 320 kbps / 44.1 files. More often its the quality of the bluetooth transmitter and not the codec which causes issues.
4. https://www.rtings.com/headphones/learn/sbc-aptx-which-bluetooth-codec-is-the-best
   Link is for comparison between SBC and aptX. Follow the actual measurements - there's a comparison of audio in that link too. Prepare to be surprised.
5. As far as pairing an R2R2K (black) with an iPhone via Bluetooth - it sounds pretty darn good. Fantastic pairing. I have no issues.
6. I haven't tried pairing the R2R2K on a wired connection (yet) to the iPhone, but if I can get a cable I will. Personally I don't see the point as the Bluetooth connection sounds great. Anyway - if you are going digital via cable, barring any jiggery-pokery via DSP (and Apple doesn't use any), then the signal will be the same. Its a DIGITAL signal. And my iPhone 11 is perfectly capable of outputting high-res over its lightning port (including DSD).

Thanks for your post Brooko!

I think am the last one who needs to be convinced that SBC is better than its reputation. Bluetooth in general!
Actually I made the experiment and used exclusively BT devices (ES100, XDSD, BTR5...) for more than a year, after having owned many DAPs.
After that experiment I feel I can hardly go back to a DAP, because BT is so much more flexible for my usage scenario and sound differences with good BT devices not as big as some people in the audiophile world claim. I wrote quite a bit about it in this forum.

This is actually why I was so curious about the R2R2000! I was wondering if Hifiman`s so-called "streaming device" maybe can take BT to the next level. And I was really interested to find out how much better LHDC actually is and try it out by myself - this is why I am so disappointed now.

But just as you said, generally, the very good DAC chip and amp section of the R2R2000 also have a big influence on BT SQ.
The question is: Does it make SQ better than the one of comparable devices?

This is my impression after using it for about one month now :
I agree with you that even in SBC mode R2R2000 still sounds very good! Imo this is mainly due to that great tonality/tuning of the device which lets it sound more „special“ than many other BT devices. The RED sounds very meaty and enthusiastic in the mids and absolutely distortion free!
There is a little "but" with BT mode though, at least to my ears: Compared to wired USB-DAC mode , I can clearly hear a (relatively) bigger decrease in treble energy, which also leads to a slightly smaller soundstage.
Many might say that this is kind of normal for BT devices, which is true, but there are other devices like the XDSD that are remarkably good in not changing the sound so much in BT mode! I have compared it many times and with XDSD there is almost no difference in treble energy in BT mode or wired!
Because the RED generally has a more roundish, softer treble and - as written - pronounced mids, I feel this loss in treble energy is especially noticeable. Wired the R2R2000 really meets the perfect sweet spot, so it`s kind of a pity.
Still, other aspects of R2R2000 RED`s sound are so nice that even in BT I sometimes prefer it over the XDSD, depending on music style. The R2R2000 red sounds really amazing with vocals while the XDSD works great with electronic music (has more subbass and wider soundstage).

I am planning to write a little review about the RED soon, these are just some first impressions as a BT device….


PS. Thanks for the article! This is also a great read about BT btw: https://habr.com/en/post/456182/

 

[gerelmx1986]

Thankfully a voice of reason Hanesu - and George, you should know better.

1. iPhones have always had quality dacs in their iPhones. Why - because its the same tech as their iPods, and they were built for music. They measure flat with low distortion. Most of the time they are significantly better than many Android devices.
2. The problem with the iPhone is that it typically has a weak amp (and again - it shares this with the majority of Smart Phones in general). If someone is trying to drive a headphone which needs more voltage or current than the iPhone can deliver, of course it'll sound below par. So will an Android with similar specs.
3. When you're talking about SBC as a poor quality codec - its actually not. Most people just like to believe they can tell lossless from lossy (so many golden ears out there!). But when you're talking about bit-rates above about 256Kbps, most music is generally transparent. Sure - you'll get the odd track which won't be, and some codecs are better than others - but as far as Bluetooth goes, SBC is just fine for music (it suffers latency issues for video). It'll also handle up to 320 kbps / 44.1 files. More often its the quality of the bluetooth transmitter and not the codec which causes issues.
4. https://www.rtings.com/headphones/learn/sbc-aptx-which-bluetooth-codec-is-the-best
   Link is for comparison between SBC and aptX. Follow the actual measurements - there's a comparison of audio in that link too. Prepare to be surprised.
5. As far as pairing an R2R2K (black) with an iPhone via Bluetooth - it sounds pretty darn good. Fantastic pairing. I have no issues.
6. I haven't tried pairing the R2R2K on a wired connection (yet) to the iPhone, but if I can get a cable I will. Personally I don't see the point as the Bluetooth connection sounds great. Anyway - if you are going digital via cable, barring any jiggery-pokery via DSP (and Apple doesn't use any), then the signal will be the same. Its a DIGITAL signal. And my iPhone 11 is perfectly capable of outputting high-res over its lightning port (including DSD).

Woe, cannot believe what i read.defending an inferior codec as SBC (is like mp3). Why then an Artist and label record such historic Organs with utmost care? Vogel could then have used a CASIO Keyboard no?

 

[Hanesu]

Woe, cannot believe what i read.defending an inferior codec as SBC (is like mp3). Why then an Artist and label record such historic Organs with utmost care? Vogel could then have used a CASIO Keyboard no?

Vogel could read here:
https://m.habr.com/en/post/456182/

 

[gerelmx1986]

Vogel could read here:
https://m.habr.com/en/post/456182/

What I hate from germany the lossy codecs they invented...if they're known for quality cars and beers they could have done lossless codecs, they only created a disservice to music industry

 

[Brooko]

Let’s see you double blind test some typical tracks successfully - then we’ll talk. And don’t forget that if you’re using Bluetooth then most of the time you’re not in a critical listening environment.

Typical “audiophile” response but one sadly I expect on this site. On most tracks most people can’t ABX high bit rate mp3 From lossless anyway. Quote in my sig is apt

Woe, cannot believe what i read.defending an inferior codec as SBC (is like mp3). Why then an Artist and label record such historic Organs with utmost care? Vogel could then have used a CASIO Keyboard no?

 

[Hanesu]

What I hate from germany the lossy codecs they invented...if they're known for quality cars and beers they could have done lossless codecs, they only created a disservice to music industry

Hey, could it just be stereotypes? I prefer to always question them! Blindly tested under scientific conditions, German beer might not be as good and MP3s not as bad as you think (I am German btw)!