I have used 3116 and 3118 based amps and find them to be handy and sound decent for their money. A current project requires a pair of small speakers, and a small subwoofer - so naturally these designs came to mind.
Looking at this design here, I had a few questions:
TPA3116 100W+2*50W Class D Amplifier Board Bluetooth 2.1 Amplifier Board New | eBay
Do these operate as whatever the source is, and then when a BT device pairs, the input will change, or?
How good/bad is Bluetooth 4.0 quality? The BT is a bonus, essentially allowing someone to stream audio from their phone/pc in lieu of the source material it normally would play. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Looking at this design here, I had a few questions:
TPA3116 100W+2*50W Class D Amplifier Board Bluetooth 2.1 Amplifier Board New | eBay
Do these operate as whatever the source is, and then when a BT device pairs, the input will change, or?
How good/bad is Bluetooth 4.0 quality? The BT is a bonus, essentially allowing someone to stream audio from their phone/pc in lieu of the source material it normally would play. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
I would love to avoid talking about those power amplifiers; however, the bluetooth looks like a good idea.
Bluetooth, usually has power supply isolation, that is hard to arrange otherwise. I sure do like the bluetooth. What with the clean, isolated, power, it could deliver a goodly impression of hi-fi. It costs less and works practically better than boutique priced PC sound cards.
I have not noticed a practical difference between the 2.1 and 4.0 bluetooth, despite the difference in specification. The 2.1 tends to be 16 bit and the 4.0 is capable of higher resolution; however, since both of them tend to blast off their more expensive peers, the remaining difference is notwithstanding. I did actually check that.
Due to the advantage of a private power supply, both of the bluetooth specs that you have mentioned, will beat almost all of PC sound cards (regardless of price), due to a difference in environment and supply noise.
After that shock, I may have failed to compare the bluetooth options.
Bluetooth, usually has power supply isolation, that is hard to arrange otherwise. I sure do like the bluetooth. What with the clean, isolated, power, it could deliver a goodly impression of hi-fi. It costs less and works practically better than boutique priced PC sound cards.
I have not noticed a practical difference between the 2.1 and 4.0 bluetooth, despite the difference in specification. The 2.1 tends to be 16 bit and the 4.0 is capable of higher resolution; however, since both of them tend to blast off their more expensive peers, the remaining difference is notwithstanding. I did actually check that.
Due to the advantage of a private power supply, both of the bluetooth specs that you have mentioned, will beat almost all of PC sound cards (regardless of price), due to a difference in environment and supply noise.
After that shock, I may have failed to compare the bluetooth options.
Thanks for the reply. Definitely not concerned now about the BT quality for this application.
My main goal is to use the amplifier because its cheap and works. Its not a HiFi application, but am hoping that with a fixed input, that the user can pair via BT a tablet or phone with the amp and send that source signal to the unit rather than the source of what I am putting the amp into.
Then hope when they unpair it, the amp goes back to the fixed input, no physical switch needed.
II have a plan based on what I've learned about audio, and am trying to bring better quality sound to a hobby that normally takes audio not so seriously... Gotta contribute what I can. Thanks for this.
My main goal is to use the amplifier because its cheap and works. Its not a HiFi application, but am hoping that with a fixed input, that the user can pair via BT a tablet or phone with the amp and send that source signal to the unit rather than the source of what I am putting the amp into.
Then hope when they unpair it, the amp goes back to the fixed input, no physical switch needed.
II have a plan based on what I've learned about audio, and am trying to bring better quality sound to a hobby that normally takes audio not so seriously... Gotta contribute what I can. Thanks for this.
I don't believe that amplifier will accept an analog input without modification, ie bluetooth only.
I beg to differ. There are many inexpensive ways to achieve very high quality audio from a PC based source.
I'm not sure so many home recording studios would be using PC sound cards for A/D and D/A IO if the quality was as poor as you make it out to be. You might choose to do a little study on the subject before spreading so much misinformation.
For those arguing... I have heard an all digital PC that had a $1200 soundcard that is very well regarded... MacIntosh and Harbeths... Was one of the sweetest sounding computer rigs I've heard. Better than some peoples analog setup.
Maybe they meant "on board" sound cards, like the typical line out on most consumer PCs... Given my non-hifi comment, perhaps he assumed (correctly) that its what most people use in the field I am lookin into.
Maybe they meant "on board" sound cards, like the typical line out on most consumer PCs... Given my non-hifi comment, perhaps he assumed (correctly) that its what most people use in the field I am lookin into.
nah onboard audio nowdays even on the cheapest of motherboards hits the mark of creative audigy2 cards of the past.
the thing is, if -be it onboard or an addon card- it gets power from the computer, then it gets noise too. in witch case external DAC connected via optical link, or by wireless methood as bluetooth has an inheritent advantage. allways. without exceptions. every single time.
the thing is, if -be it onboard or an addon card- it gets power from the computer, then it gets noise too. in witch case external DAC connected via optical link, or by wireless methood as bluetooth has an inheritent advantage. allways. without exceptions. every single time.
Sorry guys
The problem is that all of you are right.
There are indeed some PC's within most sound cards work fantastically. I have to believe it is the power supply, motherboard power circuit, motherboard digital management of those particular PC's. And, due to experience which has included attempts to replicate favorable PC environments at some expense, that the odds of a repeat success are very poor.
Therefore, I also have to report that external digital devices that don't share the same power supply as the PC are, on average count, more likely to perform as expected for a high fidelity source.
If you need a better briefing than that, then just try to buy a new model wristwatch that fits your wrist rather than your ankle. That frustration is actually worse.
The problem is that all of you are right.
There are indeed some PC's within most sound cards work fantastically. I have to believe it is the power supply, motherboard power circuit, motherboard digital management of those particular PC's. And, due to experience which has included attempts to replicate favorable PC environments at some expense, that the odds of a repeat success are very poor.
Therefore, I also have to report that external digital devices that don't share the same power supply as the PC are, on average count, more likely to perform as expected for a high fidelity source.
If you need a better briefing than that, then just try to buy a new model wristwatch that fits your wrist rather than your ankle. That frustration is actually worse.
The easiest way to get high quality audio from a PC is to make the most of the S/PDIF, Toslink or HDMI outputs that are usually available on modern PCs, with an outboard DAC of some description. That's what I've done these last 10 or more years. These three interfaces are all superior to Bluetooth.
How do we do that?
Is there a cheap way to get analogue audio from an HDMI connection?
I was using a HDMI to s/pdif audio stripper for many years similar to this one:
HDMI Audio Extractor Converter 4K Switcher-21.07 Online Shopping| GearBest.com
That fed S/PDIF to a DCX2496. It also has RCA outputs.
Last edited:
I think that this post is almost entirely fantastic!
The exception is the last sentence, and that's because bluetooth is merely wireless that has taken place of a wire or optic fiber--the bluetooth could even use the very same DAC, Power, and Analog devices; so, the inherent difference is notwithstanding. It is also necessary to conclude that no difference is not worth an argument. What is necessary is to recognize that there are several ways to hit the target.
Meanwhile, back to the majority of his post, which is fantastic: An external device could be equipped with a bit of isolation and its own power supply. At that point, opportunity for s/n has been maximized towards goodly signal.
The options that cowanaudio has advised, are available (with optic or isolator), to meet the necessary specs, which is mainly private power so as to divorce the hostile environment of the PC enclosure from the analog signal.
P.S.
After handily circumventing the fidelity foobar of the mono bridged board, which happened to have a sublime power layout, what with the simplicity of utilizing SE mode on the cheap prefab boards (now 2 for stereo) in order to get hi-fi, so expediently and cheaply. . . that was the extent of the convenience, because the next questions would have to be speaker and source of enough quality to keep up with the amp. We'll just have to consider that a nice problem to have.
I think that a bluetooth adaptor matches the price point of two slightly modified amplifier boards, almost seamlessly. However, cowanaudio is correct in his mention of (paraphrased slightly) ANY OUTBOARD AUDIO is worth a spin (more paraphrase) so long as it has its own power supply. Therefore, it is quite clear that bluetooth/wireless qualifies and cowanaudio's advices can also qualify. Indeed, his mention is quite helpful because it gives you more options of quality sources to choose from.
It is necessary to mention the basics again: The goodly source is outboard of the PC and the source has its own power supply.
And, it is also necessary to mention the exceptions: Sometimes it is possible to arrange a favorable PC with a fairly good sound card and the combination will beat all comers. That's a wonderful thing, but it is temporary. Quite likely that either the power supply or motherboard will go out and be replaced. It is NOT the least bit likely that the repaired item will meet your needs for music. DO please start with an outboard source, just as cowanaudio has advised. I would like for that outboard source to have its own power supply. That's because you will be able to retain/keep an outboard source throughout/longer than, several PC changes/replacements. The outboard source plan will be ever so much more satisfactory than having the first PC change cut off your quality.
Last edited:
i allso have to add that any decent mobo will do close to 100 dBL snr, and that qualifys i think quite nicely for the majority. i see no point in say.. 102 dBL snr, it is an improvement but i don't think i could ever tell them apart.
24 bit /192 khz is pretty standard, considering cd discs have 16 bit and 44.1 Khz , i highly doubt you need more tipically.
so the chips on motherboards are "fine" i guess. problems however occur when a low quality psu is in the system, and the connected "suff" is not really made proper, introducing ground loops.
i can safely say the onboard DACs are well whitin specs, question is the media content, the folllwing stages (amplifier, speaker) and the powersupply.
it never hurts a computer to have a decent PSU anyways so i think that should be out of the problematic questions.
however anything that is isolated and has its own powersupply (that is, it its better than the one in the pc) will give some improvement. even if the improvement is less than what you can ever tell apart.
24 bit /192 khz is pretty standard, considering cd discs have 16 bit and 44.1 Khz , i highly doubt you need more tipically.
so the chips on motherboards are "fine" i guess. problems however occur when a low quality psu is in the system, and the connected "suff" is not really made proper, introducing ground loops.
i can safely say the onboard DACs are well whitin specs, question is the media content, the folllwing stages (amplifier, speaker) and the powersupply.
it never hurts a computer to have a decent PSU anyways so i think that should be out of the problematic questions.
however anything that is isolated and has its own powersupply (that is, it its better than the one in the pc) will give some improvement. even if the improvement is less than what you can ever tell apart.
I mentioned Bluetooth, because it can offer a taste of hi-fi, at a price-point similar to the amp, and even if a phone is the source (plus that usable Onkyo app).
However, I won't object to a better source than that!
In most houses, the better equipment is probably in the same room with the TV and at least another family member is watching that TV, inadvertently guaranteeing that the better equipment never plays music unless it happened to be included on a TV or movie soundtrack.
Application? Instead of piecemeal (mix and match is unpleasant), here's a whole case. . .
SO, instead, let's talk about the kitchen or garage. In most houses those areas don't have desktop computers, chairs or big screen TV's. Therefore it is likely that one could play music in the kitchen or garage.
The old PT-810 bluetooth adapter has specs like a high-end CD player, which is quite basic for today, but importantly doesn't require a lot of bandwidth. The Wi-Fi router might not be able to jam it entirely. If you had required 24 bit /192 khz specs and also have WiFi, then bluetooth is not for you. A multi-simultaneous-channel high-bandwidth Wi-Fi router could even jam the 16 bit / 44.1 Khz PT-810 bluetooth. However, for convenience, I'll say that our case does not include a high-end Wi-Fi router in our kitchen. Perhaps a 150n Wi-Fi router would be okay--those use a single channel.
In our kitchen and/or garage cases, we could use a PT-810, a phone/tablet with the Onkyo app, and a pair of the TDA8932BT mono amplifiers (as well as a pair of speakers). That equipment is assumed for this case.
The TDA8932BT mono boards (that little board with the 5 cap power array and good layout), could offer loud mid-fi if left in BTL mode, or it could offer 1/4 as much watts in hi-fi, if set to SE mode. The latter is useful for this case, because more quality would be the thing to do, and because our kitchen is smaller than an airplane hangar and the speakers are smaller than the fridge.
With the speakers, amplifiers and bluetooth, positioned safely up above the cabinets, the controls (your phone) is then safely in your pants pocket, so that visitors to this nice sounding kitchen can't either tamper the volume or re-set the music to an unpleasant station.
The cost for our kitchen system, with a couple of recycled laptop SMPS, a phone charger, a couple of TDA8932BT mono with filter caps added for SE mode, a PT-810 and pair of secondhand speakers is somewhat $40.
That is a cheap little system! But, price wasn't entirely the point. It is a really cheap little High Fidelity system, with remote.
P.S.
Almost forgot to mention. Even a tame bluetooth can glitch, although it should be rare. That light over the sink? Tap that for the amplifier&bluetooth power in our kitchen music case. Even though the pairing glitch is rare, it still wouldn't be fun to climb the cabinets to power cycle the bluetooth.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.