shopping_cart
Auris bluMe Bluetooth Music Receiver

Auris bluMe Bluetooth Music Receiver

bookmark_border
Where's the price?
To negotiate the best possible price for our customers, we agree to hide prices prior to logging in.
308 requests
·
41 Sold
Product Description
Great for pairing with your smartphone, tablet, or computer, the Auris bluME Bluetooth receiver lets you add wireless functionality to your home audio setup without sacrificing sound quality. It’s equipped with special circuitry and a precision-tuned external high-gain antenna, and offers consistently stable, strong, and glitch-free playback throughout the 100-foot operating range Read More

search
close
HemiSam
37
Feb 8, 2018
I honestly don't get why anyone would pay for this. Smarter ways of getting there, either financially or from a quality perspective. I'm scratching my head with this one, but to each their own...
jaffe
272
Feb 16, 2018
oof. that was painful watching this hemi dips%#t go through the contortions to convince himself that his opinion has any validity at all. painful and hysterical.
heysplangy
307
Mar 7, 2018
you fail. stick to the muscle car forums where you kind of idiocy in appreciated.
EliaGar
62
Oct 29, 2017
Honestly, why?? This thing only handles older lossy formats; who cares how good the DAC is if it's being fed crapped down lossy data? APTx over A2DP has sharply restricted bandwidth. Full stop. All this talk about what is and is not possible in BT v. 5 is irrelevant, as this product supports APTx, max. Moreover, the only real-world BT audio transport that nears required bandwidth for truly good audio quality is Sony's LDAC, and LDAC is only available on a few sony products and on the latest (v8.0 and above) android devices (sorry, Apple), but even then LDAC isn't supported by most audio hardware right now anyway.
Seriously, just get a chromecast audio: it handles 16 and 24 bit lossless audio over wifi, and if you don't like its DAC, you can dump the optical signal straight from the chromecast to a DAC of your choice. Oh, and its 35 bucks.
I love massdrop and I've upped my headphone and headphone amp game considerably with great massdrop products, but this particularly offering is not up to snuff, and massdrop should help users unfamiliar with bluetooth transport and bluetooth audio compression formats to better understand what this device is, and is not, capable of doing.
Motorrad
2974
Feb 8, 2018
I had higher hopes for the Chromecast optical out but it's not cutting it. The auris optical sounds better...fortunately I didn't have to pay for it.
bilditup1
78
Oct 28, 2017
Appears to be a $5 discount on Amazon, which is sold there by Auris itself, so without tax. I dunno that $5 is enough of a savings to wait another few wks.
Mdosmar
2
Oct 28, 2017
AptX only does aptX if it's getting aptx. iPhone don't have aptX. Mdosmar
Measty
332
Oct 28, 2017
By Funke audio.
rastus
1291
Sep 10, 2017
What these folks are doing is bypassing the poor DAC typically on the Bluetooth chips, sending the data to the other off-chip superior DAC, here an AK4396 and also up-sampling. Most Bluetooth devices are, have been until recently, an audio "system-on-chip", an SoC, kinda like a PoS, thus the bad rap most here give them. I have a no-name Chinese Bluetooth (CSR8670) DAC that sends off to a 24bit ES9023 then a MUSES02, and it sounds great in the kitchen (pic). Bluetooth is just a transport means that can do up to 24Mb/s, and if it gets a good signal it can be just fine for what it is. The idea here is anyone can walk into the kitchen, linkup and play some very decent music. Oh,, if doing Bluetooth,
search
get a decent antenna please:) don't try to hide it, it's important... this bluMe has one and looks like a fine, well thought-out product.
hyOzd
3
Oct 29, 2017
@rastus I think you misunderstood me. I never meant to bash bluetooth. Sorry, if it came that way. I use a bluetooth headset myself. And I like it. Heck I'm currently in the process of developing a Bluetooth device myself (not audio though). I merely wanted to point out that Bluetooth cannot do 24mbps by itself. Nevertheless, in practice data rate of communication protocol isn't everything. Depending on the device, antenna design can be far more important which is usually limited by the physical structure of the device. That's one of the reasons why devices must be tested for actual use case. Just saying that bluetooth does 24mbps means nothing to the customer.
rastus
1291
Oct 30, 2017
On same page I think then, nice stuff coming, maybe... BT orchestrates and grabs other bands to do the heavy hauling, works: https://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1273551
Ironically the Echo Dot, FFS, has a 802.11 AMP capable Qualcomm Atheros QCA6234 chip in it, but not giving us the level of use we would like for audio, Tesla is putting it in the cars as well, hotspot comm portal. I think Apple TV and the Fire stick? Same issue, not fidelity. I say put this one in a decent wireless DAC... I said the 835 as a lark, don't really need a phone in the DAC:) dug around and found this QCA6234 chip...
We will see if we really get this, like unlocking FM on your phone,, follow the money... I couldn't find a consumer wireless DAC with BT/WiFi 802.11 AMP in it, nor any hack even building one, they are still on the bit-perfect, holy grail quest... not the unholy wireless decent into darkness... wonder when they really do get the time to listen to music?
I'm only on this wireless thing because God wanted one, my wife, and I understand that the general public wants the press the phone or the talk to it and make it sing and play solution. So why not give them the best solution possible,, because we will often have to listen to it as well, for hours...
spray
38
Aug 4, 2017
Does this support aptX Lossless? I'm not sure if that's part of aptX or if "aptX Lossless" is something specific that needs to be supported.
EDIT: Yes, I mean "aptX Lossless". It's a thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AptX#aptX_Lossless
Pierre111
413
Aug 5, 2017
This is probably something that is deprecated and date when the actual company was AptX. Historically the CODEC didn't have anything to do with Bluetooth and they where using it for professional stuff. Now AptX is own by Qualcomm and it's a Bluetooth CODEC only and it's not lossless . It's highest resolution version is AptX HD. https://www.aptx.com/aptx-hd I'm actually the founder of a compagny with an upcoming AptX HD product https://www.aptx.com/products/bluewave-audio-get-wireless-hi-fi-amplifier Being a licenced developper, trust me, there are no AptX Lossless
bilditup1
78
Oct 28, 2017
This should settle it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AptX#aptX-HD 'aptX-HD (also known as aptX Lossless)' So they renamed it some time in the past year, it seems like.
Pierre111
413
Aug 4, 2017
I find a bit odd to spec 192k 24 bit playback. There are no other inputs there than Bluetooth and AptX is quite good but the streaming is limited to 16 bit 48 kHz That's before compression but the CODEC can reconstruct quite accurately even though it's not lossless. Sound quality is very good with AptX, I don't want to say anything bad about the device and the loss of quality will be unnoticeable for most, but those specs are a little misguiding, the DAC probably supports it and there might even be some oversampling involved but that doesn't mean much, the audio in the end is not at this resolution.
pshanks01
67
Feb 3, 2017
Not spending money on bluetooth streaming until the manufacturers agree on how to avoid digital compression. No point spending a lot of dollars on the dac/amp/spkrs if the incoming data is mush. The technology standards include support for compression-less streaming, but the manufacturers on the source and sink sides aren't yet aligned. That's the reason why you don't see any mention of compression in the product specs or descriptions.
mcnbns
31
Feb 3, 2017
Paging Dr. Fünke...
Showing 42 of 53
keyboard_arrow_up
Newest
53 OF 53 POSTS
keyboard_arrow_down
Oldest