A day with out RCA cables....bluetooth

[Chevillac 5,000+ posts]

And when you said that about you blue tooth thing, thats the first thing I thought about also, peoples' phone headsets. Which is why I would worry about reliability. Everyone, which is only a few but still, that I know that has bought a blue tooth headset has had a few issues from time to time. And it seems like for no reason. If that had happened to me with my system because of the blue tooth equiptment I would be pissed to no end, especially when you are driving and cant stop to mess with it.

 

[theCybe 5,000+ posts]

Digital offers greater 'quality' than analog, because digital doesn't change, distort, warp, or decay.

And, mp3s can be encoded at a high bitrate; much in the same way a 200k .JPG image can be just as crisp as a 6mb .BMP

The fidelity of the BlueTooth connection becomes irrelevant, as if it's transferring digital information (with error-correcting) at a greater rate than it's being decoded (ie; played,) there's no loss of quality. [shrug.]

I think you're missing the point; If the data is intact at the point of transmission, error correcting allows it to be reconstructed as it's received, to make an exact digital duplicate of the original "signal" at the point of conversion;

The bluetooth 'receiver' would then convert that data, at full quality, into an analog or digital signal (RCA? SPDIF?)

Thereby assuring that the weakest "SQ" point of the system, or the part where the sound deteriorates most from it's original source, is NOT the BlueTooth connection, but likely the analog amplification device, or the reproductive mechanism (speaker.)

The advantage being no signal loss through cables - the signal/music/data would get to the amp intact, at full fidelity.

So, do your research. An mp3 doesn't have to be "Poor in SQ." It can be 100% accurate, and still maintain a smaller filesize than a .WAV (your likely format of choice.)

JPEG is to BMP as

MP3 is to WAV.

 

[tRiGgEr 5,000+ posts]

Imagine bluetooth power wire adapter. Just dont get caught as a ground. Or it's bye bye for you.

One of my friends actually said the Xbox 360 was all wireless. Including the power. I was like OMFG you are dumb...

 

[theCybe 5,000+ posts]

And when you said that about you blue tooth thing, thats the first thing I thought about also, peoples' phone headsets. Which is why I would worry about reliability. Everyone, which is only a few but still, that I know that has bought a blue tooth headset has had a few issues from time to time. And it seems like for no reason. If that had happened to me with my system because of the blue tooth equiptment I would be pissed to no end, especially when you are driving and cant stop to mess with it.

Those items (wireless mouse, keyboard, cellphone headset) are often battery powered.

Amplified antennas become possible with a powered system.

 

[djman37 5,000+ posts]

They can have a band at a live concert play wireless, so why not in my car //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

Most, if not always, analog, relatively narrow freq. range for each instrument(mic), MONO. The actual instrument (production)amp speakers are mic'ed, by hard wire, to the reproduction PA system.

I've thought about wireless and also of purchasing an educational FIBER OPTIC kit for audio, trying an unbalanced system, etc. but heck, RCAs work, they're cheap, and they're already run.

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

Digital offers greater 'quality' than analog, because digital doesn't change, distort, warp, or decay.

*cough* Ehh...

Imagine bluetooth power wire adapter. Just dont get caught as a ground. Or it's bye bye for you.

Tesla would be proud.

I don't know. Even if bandwidth limitations somehow wasn't an issue, anything wireless is inherently going to have less reliability. I won't be selling my RCA's anytime soon //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[djman37 5,000+ posts]

x2, and NO, NOT the band.

 

[jester73440 10+ year member]

Xbox and p23 will have bluetooth controlers. I get no interfernce with my head set at work and we have a ton of metal and electric equipment in play here. I think MP3 quality is just as good as CD I convert all my mp3s to 320kb/s which a cd is 196 or 256.I don't mean rip out your RCAs for bluetooth but in the future installing an amp can just be a power and ground. Anyone ever try the Wifi speakers for home audio yet?

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

which a cd is 196 or 256.

CD's usually are up around 1400+ //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

 

[jester73440 10+ year member]

CD's usually are up around 1400+ //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

Are you sure? When they are ripped they come off at 256. And any program I ever seen said 192 near cd quality 256 cd quality. The files are much bigger in size then a cd

 

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

CD's usually are up around 1400+ //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

Yes, cds are 1,411 kbps. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

When they are ripped they come off at 256.

Completely dependent on your program. I burn all my MP3s that come off CD at 320k.

The files are much bigger in size then a cd

If they were, what would be the point of MP3? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif .WAV files are much bigger than the compressed MP3 files are.

 

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

Are you sure? When they are ripped they come off at 256. And any program I ever seen said 192 near cd quality 256 cd quality. The files are much bigger in size then a cd

First of all, an mp3 at its highest bitrate of 320kbps does NOT match the fidelity of a compact disc. Second of all my MusicMatch jukebox that I have on my computer says that 128 is supposed to be cd quality but we all know that is bullshyt. Oh and there is no way an mp3 file is bigger than a ripped from cd wave file. Thats just not possible.

 

[TeenWolf 10+ year member]

Yes, cds are 1,411 kbps. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

That's crazy...didn't realize it was that high!

Digital offers greater 'quality' than analog, because digital doesn't change, distort, warp, or decay.
And, mp3s can be encoded at a high bitrate; much in the same way a 200k .JPG image can be just as crisp as a 6mb .BMP

Agree, but doesn't most mp3 encoders remove a large portion of the frequency range? I hear that some cut well into the human heariing range, which would be noticeable on a good sound system.

 

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

Digital offers greater 'quality' than analog, because digital doesn't change, distort, warp, or decay.

I will agree that the storage of digital is better but to say digital is better than wave is subjective and nothing more than your opinion.

And, mp3s can be encoded at a high bitrate; much in the same way a 200k .JPG image can be just as crisp as a 6mb .BMP

Yes it can but 320kbps mp3 cannot and WILL not match the quality of a regular cd.

The fidelity of the BlueTooth connection becomes irrelevant, as if it's transferring digital information (with error-correcting) at a greater rate than it's being decoded (ie; played,) there's no loss of quality. [shrug.]

That may be correct but the reliability is VERY relevant. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

I think you're missing the point; If the data is intact at the point of transmission, error correcting allows it to be reconstructed as it's received, to make an exact digital duplicate of the original "signal" at the point of conversion;

You see even you just said it.......IF THE DATA IS INTACT......my point was more about the reliability of the wireless connection. Not necessarily the quality.

Thereby assuring that the weakest "SQ" point of the system, or the part where the sound deteriorates most from it's original source, is NOT the BlueTooth connection, but likely the analog amplification device, or the reproductive mechanism (speaker.)
The advantage being no signal loss through cables - the signal/music/data would get to the amp intact, at full fidelity.

Now that part I do agree with.

So, do your research. An mp3 doesn't have to be "Poor in SQ." It can be 100% accurate, and still maintain a smaller filesize than a .WAV (your likely format of choice.)

I don't have to do any research to know that an mp3 is inferior to compact disc. I fail to see how an mp3 can be 100% accurate. Especially if you're ripping it from a cd that it in itself is not 100% accurate.

The whole point to my rant was that the mfgs need to work on improving quality instead of conveniences. Sorry for another long post.