cell music to reciever-

I am very surprised to hear all the suggestions to use bluetooth!?!:dunno:

Bt is quite listenable now with aptx encoding being much better than it was just a few years ago. The convenience is also great. I use my smartwatch to control my bt which really makes things super easy. I can skip a song or adjust the volume while I'm in the midst of a project without getting up from it.
 
Bt is quite listenable now with aptx encoding being much better than it was just a few years ago. The convenience is also great. I use my smartwatch to control my bt which really makes things super easy. I can skip a song or adjust the volume while I'm in the midst of a project without getting up from it.
thats just the more reason i ordered the hk bt, sit back on my couch or in kitchen or outside on back steps. change music, volume.

byw motor stereo, i pulled a naughty deed while pulling cables to put gear in rack :oops:
 
Bt is quite listenable now with aptx encoding being much better than it was just a few years ago. The convenience is also great. I use my smartwatch to control my bt which really makes things super easy. I can skip a song or adjust the volume while I'm in the midst of a project without getting up from it.

atpX is a lossy codec. If the listener is satisfied with listening to lossy sound, then it is fine. For those that prefer to listen to music that matches the source as much as possible, it is still not an option. atpX-HD is somewhat improved, but it is still lossy.

Another consideration is that atpX has higher hardware requirements than standard A2DP. Both the receiver and transmitter must be able to run the codec, so older equipment likely won't work. Before relying upon atpX, it is advisable to verify that both the phone and the receiver are compatible with the codec.

As for convenience, I find my iPhone and Apple Express very convenient at home, particularly if I am moving around. Moving around the house while using BT will likely cause dropouts or lowered bit-rate transfers. In a car, BT is more viable because the phone is in one place and the noise floor is high. But I hear better quality with a direct connection in the car.
 
^^^^No doubt it's not the last word in fidelity and if I had wifi coverage at the rigs I use bt on I would be using Chromecast. Lossy or not using aptx and running a decent bt adapter into an external dac bt is quite listenable imo and very convenient.
 
atpX is a lossy codec. If the listener is satisfied with listening to lossy sound, then it is fine. For those that prefer to listen to music that matches the source as much as possible, it is still not an option. atpX-HD is somewhat improved, but it is still lossy.

Another consideration is that atpX has higher hardware requirements than standard A2DP. Both the receiver and transmitter must be able to run the codec, so older equipment likely won't work. Before relying upon atpX, it is advisable to verify that both the phone and the receiver are compatible with the codec.

As for convenience, I find my iPhone and Apple Express very convenient at home, particularly if I am moving around. Moving around the house while using BT will likely cause dropouts or lowered bit-rate transfers. In a car, BT is more viable because the phone is in one place and the noise floor is high. But I hear better quality with a direct connection in the car.

im a simple person, i don't need/want a multi million dollar setup. wether you think its lossy or isnt lossing, that comment of yours is condesending towards me, and quite frankly rude!!!
(If the listener is satisfied with listening to lossy sound, then it is fine.)
 
im a simple person, i don't need/want a multi million dollar setup. wether you think its lossy or isnt lossing, that comment of yours is condesending towards me, and quite frankly rude!!!
(If the listener is satisfied with listening to lossy sound, then it is fine.)
I don't think the reply was rude, just informative.

We don't know what we don't know.

Trying a lossless chain may be like going from hamburger to a prime ribeye steak!
 
I don't think the reply was rude, just informative.

We don't know what we don't know.

Trying a lossless chain may be like going from hamburger to a prime ribeye steak!
i know what i want, and its simple, and i dont like to make things harder then they need to be.
a simple hk bt is all i need, an didnt know i could go that route from cell music to stereo.
 
im a simple person, i don't need/want a multi million dollar setup. wether you think its lossy or isnt lossing, that comment of yours is condesending towards me, and quite frankly rude!!!
(If the listener is satisfied with listening to lossy sound, then it is fine.)

I don't understand your comment about a multi million dollar setup. My Airport Express was purchased used and cost me much less than a decent BT receiver such as others are recommending.

As for BT being lossy, that is a fact, not opinion. What I think about it is immaterial.

If you think my comment was condescending, then I think you are being overly sensitive to comments on the Internet.

In many circumstances and cases people do not care about SQ. My sound system in my home gym is not very good. Between the clanking iron and my panting, I am fine listening to lossy music. I stream on-line music (not HD) and use the analog headphone jack on an old phone.

You have not indicated any desire for a particular sound quality, but others may find it important.
 
mods can lock it all they want, i got my answer from 2 members. and im going with and ordered a hk bt.
since i also stated if there was, wait for it- other options besides a longer cord. -thats keyword here. an bluetooth was my answer.
 
Back
Top Bottom