Science Confirms That Bluetooth Headphones Are "Mostly Terrible"

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Recent tests by SoundGuys confirms what most audiophiles already knew: when it comes to Bluetooth headphones, “wired is still king for quality.” The fundamental issue is that most BT codecs have “measurable quality issues,” preventing wireless headsets from sounding as good as their simpler brethren.

Every single Bluetooth codec out there exhibits a higher level of noise than wired audio, though only AAC, SBC, and LDAC 330kbps exhibit audible noise. Where wired audio can handle CD audio and 24-bit music, Bluetooth headphones simply can’t, though 24-bit is dramatic overkill anyways. If you like your music loud, Bluetooth will be noisier than wired listening, depending on how high you crank it.
 
"But wireless is the future"

Yeah, but let's live in the present, tech should be used to make our life easier, but I guess is more of a fashion statement and an ideology now

Edit: I would like to add, just give development more time till the prices, reliability and battery life is good enough to replace wired and then it will become the present
 
?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2F3o7abonV6K9irq7kaY%2Fgiphy.gif
 
cram dac, battery, amplifier, charging circuit and wireless solution plus buttons leds etc .... into same space as in analog headphones...
and expect to have similar sound quality for similar cost... seems legit
 
not to mention extra EMI from wireless is NOT a good thing when it is blasting directly into your head, few wireless anything I have personally used have not resulted in varying levels of "brainbuzz" I know a few of my buds that use IEM (wireless buds of any type including bluetooth) that also noticed this.

some that "buzzing" is nasty bad, others it is always present but not as noticeable.

I remember years ago with a wireless (cordless) phone was talking on it one day and it felt like somebody put a caddle prod in my ear..got rid of phone that moment.

to each own, but I did read studies on this that the EMI from wireless (including bluetooth) can be magnitudes worse then similar EMI one is expected to receive from a wired connection.

it might save some space in the phone or whatever, but, already bombarded by EMI radiation, should we be seeking to take an even higher dose..not for me, so I continue to use wired earbuds/headset as long as possible beyond a financial cost reason ^.^
 
TBH, I can't tell the difference anymore, and most likely neither can 99.9% of the rest of the population. I have been pretty happy with my bose soundsports. Except they turn off from heat repeatedly in the summer or bikram or basically anytime it's >100 ambient.
 
Sound quality aside, IMO the big advantage for wired is the basic simplicity and long term reliability. I can dig out a set of wired headphones I packed away a decade or so ago, connect via audio jack and they will likely work as well as when they were packed away. Plus no software drivers, pairing or such to mess with prior to listening. Or finding out that due to their age, they are no longer supported by current BT driver sets. IMO, this courageous move to wireless headphone/earpieces is to create one more thing we have to replace every couple of years.
 
Sure, Bluetooth may not sound the best but I'm willing to give up some audio quality to get the convenience of being cordless. Like everything in life, it's a give and take.
 
I've got the Sony WH-1000XM2 since I have a daily train commute and they're awesome (the ones pictured are the XM3 released this year but basically the same). If the battery dies (which it never does if you charge them every now and again) you can still use the detachable cable (included). I've got Sennheiser HD600's for my house but I don't need to be Ultra Hi-Fi Man on my way to work, especially when a loud commute would wreck the sound anyway.
 
Gotta give this new tech a try; Wire(TM). Zero latency, high fidelity, no recharging hassle. They even make mice with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
Ihaveworms said:
Sony Bluetooth headphones can do ldac at 990kbps. Seems plenty enough.
Click to expand...

LDAC is proprietary. Not every device supports it.

In fact, the biggest problem with Bluetooth is the number of different codecs and the fact that there is no universal codec for high quality audio. Also, try using Bluetooth headphones in the city when you are in an apartment complex or highrise with 100 other wireless networks in range operating on the 2.4ghz frequency.
 
Wireless headphones would be too heavy, if they didn't suck.

I still have some Pioneer headphones from the 70's that I listen to music with; they'll handle 30 watts.

A class D amplifier will never be high quality, no matter what the marketing.

I'm using a Razor 7.1 set I got a few years ago, Raped and modified to my liking; all Class A amps now.

Wireless is like adding a 5W microwave to your head. I aint doin that.
 
Sitting on a plane with a scream
kid three seats back, after an Ambian and a Jack I can’t tell the difference.

That being said, my shitty cheap $6 earbuds with the silicone inserts are -awesome-.

They sound like shit, but they are cheap enough I don’t care if I lose them, they don’t fall out of my ears when my head starts to nod off, and as soon as I crank that awesome inflight entertainment up, I can’t hear the kid anymore.
 
Was there any actual listening to music done? If this was just just measurements with a device it seems rather useless and not relevant. As well as stating it many cases if you are older than 24 it doesn’t matter? Horrible article and I am surprised it was referenced
 
Also:
They never ever fucking ever, just work.
You always have to jiggle the handle juuuust right to keep them working trough the day.

I wish i could go back in time and kill Bluetooth in the cradle.
Whatever would have came instead, couldn't be worse.
 
I dont use any form of wireless, outside of my phone and the controller for my RC toys.
Wires only ( for data or sound ) that should ensure only the dedicated people do what they do, and the noobs dont pollute our airwaves with wifi.
 
For my daily commute in train the wireless solution is still better. To often the cable get pulled by strangers and their umbrellas. And the quality is fine for that purpose. At home wired would be used; if I had proper source devices (which I don’t).
So audiophile know what they want; for the mass I believe wireless is just fine; biased and unscientific.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
They also cost $350. I can get analog headphones that sound as good as that or better for under $100. Again, hence the problem with the whole headphone jack debacle.
Click to expand...

The selling point of the Sony headphones is noise cancelling. I wear them every day at work to block out obnoxiously loud coworkers. Even though they are bluetooth, I still use the analog input for them.

damicatz said:
LDAC is proprietary. Not every device supports it.

In fact, the biggest problem with Bluetooth is the number of different codecs and the fact that there is no universal codec for high quality audio. Also, try using Bluetooth headphones in the city when you are in an apartment complex or highrise with 100 other wireless networks in range operating on the 2.4ghz frequency.
Click to expand...

Not every device supports it, yes. But support is growing. With Android 8.0, any device is able to support it if the manufacturer wants to. My LG G7 supports it.
 
Bluetooth is still hilariously shit?! :jawdrop:

Wow! news flash! I'm so surprised. :rolleyes:
 
Personally I was never a fan of head phones, bluetooth or otherwise. But I find a set of BT head phone the most convenient method of listening to a weekly radio program (now internet program) or listening to audio books. For just chilling out and enjoying some music I find headphone to uncomfortable. My dream system was always a set of Klipschorns and descent high end amp and preamp. That would be hours of listening pleasure to me. But unfortunately in our current house there is no place for such a thing. :(
 
Ihaveworms said:
The selling point of the Sony headphones is noise cancelling. I wear them every day at work to block out obnoxiously loud coworkers. Even though they are bluetooth, I still use the analog input for them.



Not every device supports it, yes. But support is growing. With Android 8.0, any device is able to support it if the manufacturer wants to. My LG G7 supports it.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of analog noise cancelling headphones that are not only cheaper, but actually do a better job for a third the price. So I'm pretty sure the selling point is Wireless and Sony because objectively speaking there are better headphones for sound quality and noise cancellation for far less.
 
I really want to find the group that funds all these NSS studies and do some "studies" myself so I can get paid for doing basically nothing.
 
I use BT headphones and speakers for listening to podcasts while I'm working or cleaning up. Never music.
 
Obviously if you already listen to mp3 or most streaming services that gives you compressed audio, you're probably not going to notice BT compression. If you really do listen to high end music, then you probably use a usb-DAC anyways. For 97% of my music/podcast use, BT headphones are great. When I want quality I hook my wired phones up to my receiver.
 
My experience with Bluetooth headphones.

  1. Spend between two minutes and two hours pairing (Hours if your windows 600+ meg Bluetooth driver stack needs updated)
  2. Use Bluetooth and get annoyed at it cutting in and out to save battery. Silence, sound plays, delay as headset kicks on, sound is done and enjoy the background hiss until it decides to power save again.
  3. After around three days of use get sick of the above and dont feel like recharging
  4. Set headset on shelf
  5. Plug in free or $4 wired earbuds with inline Mic.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
There are plenty of analog noise cancelling headphones that are not only cheaper, but actually do a better job for a third the price. So I'm pretty sure the selling point is Wireless and Sony because objectively speaking there are better headphones for sound quality and noise cancellation for far less.
Click to expand...

What are these mythical noise canceling headphones that beat Bose QC II and Sony WH-1000XM2/3 in function, let alone for far less $?
 
I bet most people can't tell the difference. With compressed audio and normal (non-silent) environments it doesn't really matter.
 
Insert something about mental health issues developed from all the years dealing with BT input lag... :vomit:

gunbust3r said:
My experience with Bluetooth headphones.

  1. Spend between two minutes and two hours pairing (Hours if your windows 600+ meg Bluetooth driver stack needs updated)
  2. Use Bluetooth and get annoyed at it cutting in and out to save battery. Silence, sound plays, delay as headset kicks on, sound is done and enjoy the background hiss until it decides to power save again.
  3. After around three days of use get sick of the above and dont feel like recharging
  4. Set headset on shelf
  5. Plug in free or $4 wired earbuds with inline Mic.
Click to expand...
 
The only advantage I've found with wireless/bluetooth is if you're doing something where wired gets in your way (jogging, walking, riding a bike, etc).

Otherwise, I'll stick with wired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Esso
like this
I laugh my ass off when i see people on the street wearing headsets that are larger then the set of Bayer dynamics i used to listen to music when i was a audiophile.
And this are mostly knowing that it is not for the quality of the sound people do this, it is for the hype of the brand of headphones. :rolleyes:
 
meh, yeah, if you're super-hardcore then of course, but I'm using Sony MDRs (1st gen) and the quality is very good for me, while the advantages outweigh any minor losses in quality. Pretty much no connection losses, other than sometimes in very busy areas. If I'm at my desk or watching TV, I get no sync issues or skips and the sound is great. No pairing issues, either.

I think it really depends on which set you are using. I've had a cheaper set that some bad delay issues.
 
I've only had bad experiences with anything using blue tooth. Also it reminds me of those people with one bad central incisor... is that smoking related? Maybe when they get this to a working condition they can call it white tooth...
 
If I'm stuck with ringing from tinnitus in my ears, than I'm nowhere near the person to complain about audio quality. It doesn't mean shit to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top