Jump to content

External Speakers For Gpx6000


Recommended Posts

 I was looking for an external speaker to put closer to my ears.

I see the 6k uses bluetooth and picked up a LEZII BT525 wireless waterproof speaker with volume control.

The speaker works and pairs up with the GPX6000.

Anybody else doing this, and what speakers are known to work?

https://www.amazon.com/Shower-Speaker-Bluetooth-Waterproof-Portable/dp/B07JVHGN54/ref=asc_df_B07JVHGN54/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312099670269&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8403305686597357607&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9051682&hvtargid=pla-588401982372&psc=1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


8 hours ago, Gravelwasher said:

 I was looking for an external speaker to put closer to my ears.

I see the 6k uses bluetooth and picked up a LEZII BT525 wireless waterproof speaker with volume control.

The speaker works and pairs up with the GPX6000.

Anybody else doing this, and what speakers are known to work?

https://www.amazon.com/Shower-Speaker-Bluetooth-Waterproof-Portable/dp/B07JVHGN54/ref=asc_df_B07JVHGN54/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312099670269&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8403305686597357607&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9051682&hvtargid=pla-588401982372&psc=1

 

The Avantree Torus neck speaker discussed below and in other threads (just search the forum on Avantree Torus) is a popular choice for GPX 6000 users as, unlike yours, it supports APTX low latency AND you have the option to use the built in earbuds for specific situations.  However, unlike yours, it is not waterproof but being wireless, it can be worn on the inside of a hooded rain jacket.  Yours is a lot less expensive, but I think you will find the lack of APTX Low Latency compatibility (which is the standard Minelab relies on for the 6000 and also Equinox to remove excessive audio delay present in most non-low-latency bluetooth speakers and headphones/earbuds) to present an intolerable delay that will affect your ability to center on and pinpoint targets.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully Blutooth 5.0 is much faster than 4.2 and should have a latency very similar to APTX LL if not the same. I have read that APTX LL is around 35 and Bluetooth 5.0 latency around 20-40 milliseconds.

Fingers crossed, should get out to test this evening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Gravelwasher said:

Hopefully Blutooth 5.0 is much faster than 4.2 and should have a latency very similar to APTX LL if not the same. I have read that APTX LL is around 35 and Bluetooth 5.0 latency around 20-40 milliseconds.

Fingers crossed, should get out to test this evening.

Unfortunately, you appear to be mixing apples and oranges.  Not surprising since the Bluetooth standard is generally a just a confusing jumble of technical jargon for the average consumer/end user to interpret, manufacturers of BT hardware provide woefully inadequate, ambiguous, imprecise, or incomplete descriptions of equipment features and the BT "standard" itself even presents technical challenges and incompatibilities for the manufacturer trying to incorporate the BT compliant technology into their equipment.

BT 5 does not affect latency it is just the latest standard that supports the family of latest BT features, control protocols, codecs, and hardware that could be used.  It is up to the audio equipment manufacturer to decide what subset of the BT 5 supported features  (such as low latency codecs like APTX LL) to include in their BT 5 compliant equipment.  It is the codec (hardware/soft combo that encodes/compresses/transmits/decodes the wireless audio) that affects latency.  So BT 5 is not "faster" than 4.2 and BT 5 does not determine latency, but it is true that it theoretically can incorporate lower latency codecs that may not be compatible with the BT 4.2 standard.  BT 5 is not a codec like APTX LL it just supports APTX LL, but the fact is BT 4.2 also supported APTX LL.   

The device itself has to have the proprietary hardware (APTX enabling chipset) to support the low latency codes.  If you do a deep dive into the reviews you'll see folks complaining about high latency that in this case manifests in video being out of sync with the wirelessly transmitted audio to the speaker. 

Quote

My only complaint with these speakers is the lack of aptX support, but that is perhaps a bit unfair because it is a rare feature indeed. As I'm writing this at the end of 2019, I lament that in order to maintain video lip sync on Android devices, aptX support is still a must have feature, for shame Android! Both aptX low latency and aptX HD have incredibly low latency, enough to compensate for the (typically) atrociously high audio latency present in the Android software stack.

This latency issue is not just an android issue BTW.

Surprised you took the leap on the purchase despite asking for feedback ostensibly before purchase.  

Some folks find the latency of even APTX low latency wireless (40 ms)  to be intolerable others have no problem with delays up to 1/4 second (250 ms) which is likely where this speaker falls out.

Anyway, good luck, hope it works out...maybe you will be able to deal with it and it will be a non issue for you as the price is right at $20.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got the wired version of this, JBL Clip 2. I used it on my AQ, no doubt loud and able to hear thru lots of beach noise. When compared to head phones one can hear more details, and fainter targets. Not sure about the bluetooth model, Wired model you do have to be handy with wiring, I put a coiled cord with the M-8 fitting to fit the AQ. Clip the unit to my chest, to loud for near the ear. (FV)  Full volume I would say to loud for hunting where someone is with in 50/100 yards? They may complain about the noise.

20220721_121427.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I hear the delay in aptX LL but I used delay as an effect for 50 years so a little more "tuned in" to it than most !  (I'll take the wires please !)

Believe it or not many of you are tuned in to it too !  George Martin used ~30ms delays on The Beatles vocals extensively ! So did I but not on the Beatles , they broke up during my senior year in high school ! I started doing shows a few years after that ..

JoeOBN

Love JBL ! 👍👍Been a fave since the 70s.  

A lot of experience with them in pro audio , if they gave me a choice , I'd a had their pro gear facing me every show !  Also have a pair of bookshelfs and think their earbuds are the best sounding ones I've ever owned .   I have a pair of those clip speakers too  Joe !

And YES they're very capable of being LOUD ! 

I never worked for JBL ( but they sure have worked for me ) and I WISH they would pay me to say stuff like this ! LOL  

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I wanted to do some testing and have a few options for connecting and using the 20$ speaker.

The speaker can be plugged in directly with headphone jack to a Tron APTX 2 in 1 Tx Rx device and paired that way.

The 2 in 1 wireless device can be plugged into my non bluetooth detector and then pair the 6000's wireless headphones.

If I like the tron wireless device I may get a 2nd one so I can pair an external speaker to my GpZ, with one on the Z and one wireless on me plugged into a speaker.

So many options with these lil bluetooth 2 in 1 devices.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gravelwasher said:

The speaker can be plugged in directly with headphone jack to a Tron APTX 2 in 1 Tx Rx device and paired that way.

Yeah. That is the way to go if you find the speaker has too much delay using its own built in BT receiver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason you don't see aptX low latency stuff is it was retired in 2018, it's an outdated discontinued codec, detector manufacturers like Minelab have continued to use it as it suits their purpose, the chips must be difficult for them to source I would think, they must have a special contract with Qualcomm.

aptX LL

aptX LL or aptX Low Latency is intended for video and gaming applications requiring comfortable audio-video synchronization whenever the stereo audio is transmitted over short-range radio to the listener(s) using the Bluetooth A2DP audio profile standard. The technology offers an end-to-end latency of 32 ms over Bluetooth. By comparison, the latency of standard Bluetooth stereo varies greatly depending on the system implementation and buffering. Solutions are available that use standard SBC encoding/decoding that achieve end-to-end latency of less than 40 ms. The recommended latency for audio-to-video synchronization in broadcast television is within +40 ms and −60 ms (audio before/after video, respectively).[36] However, AptX Low Latency requires a dedicated, wireless antenna, so it did not achieve much adoption in smartphones and was retired by Qualcomm in favor of aptX Adaptive.[37] Its main competitor is the LLAC.

Another source talking about it.

Released in 2018, Qualcomm’s aptX Adaptive is a Bluetooth audio codec that combines robust, premium audio quality, low-bit rate transmission, scalability, and the opportunity for low latency. It’s intended to provide a superior wireless listening experience, and sets out to solve a number of the biggest issues in Bluetooth audio.

Speaking of latency, aptX Low Latency is being retired after the launch of Adaptive, which has some implications for backward compatibility. When connecting to Low Latency devices, Adaptive will default back to aptX Classic. In other instances, aptX Adaptive simply matches the capabilities and bitrate of the Classic or HD-capable device, so product transition should be seamless.

So this explains why it is so hard to get any decent aptX low latency speakers or headphones, it's done and dusted years ago and was a bit of a flop.   I wouldn't expect to see new headphones or speakers appear with support for it.  The big problem with it is if it has a weak signal or interference it crackles and pops, where as adaptive works around this by adjusting bitrate to ensure the audio is stable and glitch free which is great for people using it for music or TV.  The problem for detectors is its 80ms which many detectorists find too slow.  I don't think it'd matter much for me prospecting but for coin hunting it would be a bit of an issue digging neat plugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, phrunt said:

I wouldn't expect to see new headphones or speakers appear with support for it.

Agree. It is unlikely.

The real problem is not just the demise of APTX-LL but that ML and Nokta (apologies for bringing Nokta into a ML thread, but it's relevant) went all-in on APTX-LL with the GPX 6000 and Legend without providing their proprietary wireless hardware radio systems (Wi-Max for ML and "Green" wireless for Nokta) as built-in backups for their two newest detectors.  Doh!  Poor decisional foresight in both cases (Equinox supports Wi-Max and BT-LL) and now Nokta has to provide a new wireless pinpointer with a dead-end BT technology (APTX-LL) for compatibility with Legend.  Hope they at least retain Nokta "Green" wireless compatibility on the new wireless PP and consider forward fitting their proprietary wireless radios into a future variant of Legend.

However, regardless of APTX-LL's demise, there is still plenty of quality, legacy APTX-LL hardware out there (see this thread) like Avantree Torus and other excellent Avantree offerings, Creative has some great APTX-LL phones, and some others that should provide several years of reliable service until the next generation of wireless detectors hit the streets with the APTX Adaptive or whatever comes down the pike at that point.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...