Most new Android phones come with android 10/11 which should support full LDAC. If you have iPhone, it only supports AAC.how du i knw my mbl support ldac 990kbps?
3.5mm earphones use analog audio and not digital. The concept of bitrates doesn't apply here.does all 3.5mm earphones support 990kbps?
Spatial is just a marketing term for Apple which incorporates both their head tracking stuff and the Atmos bit. Atmos is a type of spatial audio tech, along with the Apple one, Sony 360 degree audio, DTS X, Auro 3D etc etc etc...spatial vs atmos?
How do I play hi res using TV bluetooth?Most new Android phones come with android 10/11 which should support full LDAC. If you have iPhone, it only supports AAC.
Just connect any LDAC capable set and you can see all of this in Developer settings. Attaching some screenshots.
View attachment 59878
View attachment 59879
3.5mm earphones use analog audio and not digital. The concept of bitrates doesn't apply here.
Spatial is just a marketing term for Apple which incorporates both their head tracking stuff and the Atmos bit. Atmos is a type of spatial audio tech, along with the Apple one, Sony 360 degree audio, DTS X, Auro 3D etc etc etc...
Hi-res audio isn't possible using Bluetooth. The best Bluetooth can do (with LDAC) is stereo 990 Kbps, which isn't even CD quality. I've never used android TV either, so not sure how that works.How do I play hi res using TV bluetooth?
10k speakers will sound like 10k speakers, Atmos or otherwise. Atmos won't magically make bad speakers sound better. In fact, adding Atmos to cheap speakers will just make them sound worse than usual as resources go towards licensing and adding height channels rather than putting better speakers in.my device also supporting LDAC, waiting for Spotify,990kbps is only affordble option since atmos gear is more expensive
we can expect atmos earphones in cheap price(10k) when atmos got demand
am talking about earphones,i know 10k speakers wont give atmos effect10k speakers will sound like 10k speakers, Atmos or otherwise. Atmos won't magically make bad speakers sound better. In fact, adding Atmos to cheap speakers will just make them sound worse than usual as resources go towards licensing and adding height channels rather than putting better speakers in.
Why are you linking a 1 hour 10 minute YouTube video. I'm not going to watch it. If you link a video, link it with the timestamp. Go to the time you want to link, right-click on the video, select 'Copy video URL at current time' and paste that.am talking about earphones,i know 10k speakers wont give atmos effect
read comments onlyWhy are you linking a 1 hour 10 minute YouTube video. I'm not going to watch it. If you link a video, link it with the timestamp. Go to the time you want to link, right-click on the video, select 'Copy video URL at current time' and paste that.
For example, this is a link to the same video if I want to link at the 20-minute mark. If you click on it, it will open at 20:00 and start from there:
I mean 990kbps is good enough. It's hard for me to find a difference between 4000kbps vs ~900kbps FLAC files. The reason why I was asking is that, of the many movies I download via the internet, I see them having audio around 700 kbps which can have benefit over 320kbps one. The device I wanted to use is my LDAC supported earphones. I don't understand how wired can be alternative in that case considering the distance of watching.Hi-res audio isn't possible using Bluetooth. The best Bluetooth can do (with LDAC) is stereo 990 Kbps, which isn't even CD quality. I've never used android TV either, so not sure how that works.
For a TV, you absolutely should use wired audio. If you're thinking of Bluetooth audio, better just stick with the TV's crappy speakers.
Kbps is not the right way to compare this. Even a 700 Kbps audio file won't be transmitted losslessly via bluetooth depending on the encoding.I mean 990kbps is good enough. It's hard for me to find a difference between 4000kbps vs ~900kbps FLAC files. The reason why I was asking is that, of the many movies I download via the internet, I see them having audio around 700 kbps which can have benefit over 320kbps one. The device I wanted to use is my LDAC supported earphones. I don't understand how wired can be alternative in that case considering the distance of watching.
Totally get it. Only issue is that I am not getting any option to choose LDAC, SBC etc on my Tv where as it quite easy on Android mobiles.Kbps is not the right way to compare this. Even a 700 Kbps audio file won't be transmitted losslessly via bluetooth depending on the encoding.
Most 600-700 Kbps files in movies and TV shows have 5.1 channel audio. The bitrate is low because they're compressed in DTS or Dolby Digital/+ formats. Bluetooth is stereo only, so that 5.1 channel audio will be downmixed to stereo and then transmitted over Bluetooth.
If you want to use a headphone though, LDAC is the best it can get. I don't have an android box to test it out though.
Can't really help you with that as I don't have an android box.Totally get it. Only issue is that I am not getting any option to choose LDAC, SBC etc on my Tv where as it quite easy on Android mobiles.
Or they could be coming out with an external DAC (upgrade to their current dongle perhaps)? Not everyone wants a high-end DAC in their phone. Just a thought.The funny thing about Apple music is that only some android devices with inbuilt hires DAC can natively play true lossless hires (24bit 96/192kHz) from their streaming service. All apple devices are limited to max 24bit 48kHz.
Looks like apple bosses didn't properly think through thier long term strategy. They were probably busy finding innovative ways to make thier fanboys spend more on their products .
Well, either that, or they were in a rush to preempt (and derail) Spotify’s lossless launch. Amazon had already launched lossless in certain markets. It won’t be that difficult for Apple to come up with app and/or AirPlay updates in the next few months that couid overcome current limitations. While from a customer perspective what couid seem as cart before the horse, might be an effective competitive ploy for Apple.Looks like apple bosses didn't properly think through thier long term strategy. They were probably busy finding innovative ways to make thier fanboys spend more on their products .
few users use Amazon in india ,apple music is garbage for Android,i think Spotify will get huge demand if they launch with present priceWell, either that, or they were in a rush to preempt (and derail) Spotify’s lossless launch. Amazon had already launched lossless in certain markets. It won’t be that difficult for Apple to come up with app and/or AirPlay updates in the next few months that couid overcome current limitations. While from a customer perspective what couid seem as cart before the horse, might be an effective competitive ploy for Apple.
Couldn't agree more. As I said in the main apple music thread, it even takes minutes to load my library on an a+ 100 mbps connection. Imagine that in 2021! Loading library!! I hadn't even seen that word in any app till now on android.apple music is garbage for Android