>With Bluetooth becoming increasingly important in our computer hardware these days, general improvements to the wireless standard directly impact products like the iPhone, Apple Watch, and more than ever wireless headphones. The Bluetooth SIG will officially announce Bluetooth 5 next Thursday at a London press event.
>Bluetooth 5.0 will be four times as fast as Bluetooth 4.2 LE, say its developers - that means a maximum throughput of 2Mbps by our quick maths. You're not likely to get up to those speeds out in the real world but it should still be a significant speed jump.
>The other major improvement is a doubling of the range from earlier versions, so theoretically you could be 660 feet (200 metres) or so away from your Bluetooth speaker and still beam a song to it. The exact distance limits depend on the hardware you're using.
http://9to5mac.com/2016/06/10/bluetooth-5-improvements/
http://www.techradar.com/news/networking/bluetooth-5-everything-you-need-to-know-1323060
>>55010105
O L D N E W S
L
D
N
E
W
S
Hope this means bluetooth headphones will finally transmit stereo 40.1Khz sample rate 1.4mbps WAV audio instead of encoding music to 96kbps bluetooth audio codec.
>>55010181
*44.1Khz
>>55010181
It must happen for the wireless headphone revolution to happen.
>>55010181
What about lossless encoding?
>>55010229
That's what WAV is ya dingus. FLAC is not possible for real time audio transmission because it requires too much processing power to compress the audio.
>>55010206
Beats are dogshit. Not sure why anyone would purchase these turds over a pair of audio technica headphones.
>>55010296
beats are more comfy, look better, don't have proprietary connectors, and have better bass
>>55010296
ATH-WS99BT Solid Bass Wireless Over-Ear Headphones with Built-in Mic & Control
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/headphones/8a815b57a4ce51a7/index.html
>>55010326
>Implying
>>55010326
>beats are more comfy
Subjective opinion
>look better
Subjective opinion heavily influenced by aggressive marketing campaigns and celebrity endorsements
>don't have proprietary connectors
As do 99.999 percent of high-quality headphones
>and have better bass
The whole point of studio headphones is to provide a 1:1 reproduction of the audio the way it was intended to be heard. Beats are extremely bassy but that's actually a bad thing because you're not hearing what the musicians intended, just an awful noise.
>>55010326
>protip: they don't
They're just a chink pair of $5 headphones with a logo on them.
>>55010273
>FLAC is not possible for real time audio transmission because it requires too much processing power to compress the audio.
actually because it's a non-stream compressor, plenty of audio FPGAs and DSPs can handle the format no problem
Real issue: you need to transmit the entire file, 100% of its size in bytes, before you can play a single sample. Also have a correspondingly large buffer (many MBs) on the receiving device which is incredible impractical for headphone. This is because the entire file is encoded at-once instead of in blocks or stream. Contrast mp3, wav, etc where you can look at the first 1% of a file only and that is enough to play it.
>>55010438
eventually this would be ideal though (when transmission speeds are fast enough) because bulk transferring a file from the source device to the headphones all at once would mean that both could turn off the transmitter/receiver module more quickly (race to sleep)
>>55010326
>have better bass
What is this even supposed to mean? Do YOU even know what you mean?
>>55010392
nothing subjective at all... m50x are literally clamps
they do look better, any sane person will tell you that
why do you need a proprietary connector for a 3.5mm jack? that's just pure greed
>The whole point of studio headphones is to provide a 1:1 reproduction of the audio
then all headphones would sound the same.. do a blind-eye test and i guarantee you more people will prefer beats over m50x
>>55011210
>he doesn't feel the oomph
>>55011210
You can't enjoy a good drop if you ain't got DAT BASS.
>>55011273
Aww he's retarded
>>55010105
bluetooth eats battery
>>55011210
>>55011299
>>55011324
>what is an equaliser
Either you want headphones that reproduce what was recorded or get some shitty meme phones that color the sound to no end.
>>55010326
>better bass
You must be trolling.
>>55010986
Yeah but what if you have an entire album in a single ~600MiB file? It would take a lot of time before you can start playing it, and you may run out of buffer. Also if you switch between a lot of tracks, because you're looking for a song and you don't recall its name or something, that +0.5 sec it takes to transfer the file becomes annoying really fucking quick. Streaming in wav is better, and an average flac is 60-70% the size of a wav so the difference is basically nothing.
>>55010181
Bluetooth 4.1 can already transmit around 800kbps
>>55010105
in the end it'll just use even more power, and you'll end up microwaving your brain
inb4
>non-ionising radiation doesn't cause brain cancer
>>55011731
>>55010438
wait, the FLAC COMPRESSOR is non-streaming but the audio stream certainly is
if your audio was in WAV (who does this), then just stream WAV
if your audio is losslessly compressed, just stream the compressed file since there's nothing to be gained by streaming in wav or flac
if your audio is in FLAC you can stream the file no problem
the only issue is if you are encoding or transcoding to FLAC on-the-fly, in which case the entire file will need to be encoded before you can start streaming it to headphones
>>55011851
Bluetooth 4.1 already uses less power than 4.0 and has higher transfer rates
>tfw there will never be a BB10OS BlackBerry with Bluetooth 5
>>55011851
>falling for the "cell phones cause cancer" meme
In 2015, the European Commission Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks concluded that, overall, the epidemiologic studies on cell phone radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation exposure do not show an increased risk of brain tumors or of other cancers of the head and neck region.
Source: SCENIHR. 2015. Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks: Potential health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF): http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/emerging/docs/scenihr_o_041.pdf
>>55010105
>you need to worry about haxxxors over 200 meters away reading your wireless keystrokes
Will the new Surface Pro 5/Surface 4 have BT5?
>2 mbps
What is Bluetooth useful for?
Also someone tell me, is the WiFi Direct clusterfuck over in Android or not?
>>55012209
I use it all the time for a PAN, it'll be nice to have a 4x speed bump
so u can finally play videos/games with wireless sound without factor of second lipsync/lag?
>>55012247
What actually do you use it for?
>>55012564
Getting Internet on my UMPC and netbook in the middle of nowhere
>>55012209
IoT
>>55012209
I've never owned a Bluetooth device and have no need to far. Last Bluetooth I used was probably v2 or v3 and it was utter trash.
Maybe the next wifi standard could include a low power and lower bandwidth standard for really small devices.
>>55013334
congrats you just invented Wi-Fi HaLow
>>55013459
Neat
