Thanks, this is very helpful. Just turned on lossless and set everything to hifi lossless. Will test it out today and report back.
Curious - the same article says you need a wired connection to listen to audio at lossless quality levels. By extension, wouldn’t that apply to Apple Carplay as well?
Wireless Apple CarPlay can stream up to Lossless quality since it utilizes a Wi-Fi connection.
Hi-Res Lossless requires a wired connection and whether your car can benefit depends on the capability of its DAC, although there’s honestly a significantly diminishing benefit at this level.
I would stick to standard Apple Lossless, Hi-Res Lossless uses about 4x more data and the difference is frankly probably not going to be tangible.
Good point about the wifi connection with Apple carplay. I have unlimited data on my plan so I’m not worried about that per se but you’re likely right about the diminishing returns.
Will try both modes today and update this thread. Not an audiophile by any means so I’m hoping the difference is significant.
That’s because the Apple-branded stuff doesn’t support lossless audio as they use Apple’s AAC Bluetooth connection. See this Apple help article here: About lossless audio in Apple Music - Apple Support
Note that the section about CarPlay doesn’t explicitly say it supports lossless audio over a wireless connection, so it definitely does not support it. As confirmed here: Does wireless Apple CarPlay support lossl… - Apple Community
The limitations are on Apple’s side. They just haven’t chosen to support lossless audio via wireless CarPlay. As MICHAELSD01 mentioned, it uses a Wi-Fi connection which is more than capable of handling the task (as shown by wireless Android Auto).
Honestly, it’s not a big deal. Cars aren’t exactly good environments for enjoying high-fidelity audio playback, especially when in motion. It depends on various factors, but you’re likely not going to hear much of a difference between transparent lossy sources and lossless.
One thing you can do that will absolutely improve your listening experience is to code off the fake engine noise through Bimmercode or similar.
This is not an accurate statement. Bluetooth doesn’t support lossless on any device. This has nothing to do with Apple. Most modern Apple devices can play up to CD quality audio (16bit/44.1kHz).
The Apple support link you post just links to an article talking about Bluetooth limitations and is moot for a discussion about wireless CarPlay that uses WiFi.
CarPlay uses Bluetooth to set up the connection between the phone and the vehicle and then it switches to use the WiFi for the actuall functionality. Apple Music hifi uses apples new lossless format called ALAC. Therefore you are limited by the max quality your device can output and the max quality Apple supports over CarPlay
Now CarPlay uses wifi to steam from your phone but is limited to CD quality audio (16bit/44.1kHz);
There is a myriad of scientific data that the human ear cannot decipher any sound outside of this spectrum. However if you must have higher quality:
The only ways to get the file playing in your car uncompressed is to:
I don’t really have one source as this is just from me learning it over time but the most comprehensive sources I’ve found is this:
Why you don’t need over CD quality:
Context is important. I said the Apple-branded stuff (in question) doesn’t support lossless audio as they use a Bluetooth connection (for wireless playback, which was the topic). You are right that no existing Bluetooth codecs support lossless audio. I was naming the codec used, not saying ‘no Apple device can play lossless audio in any way.’
Back to the topic: wireless CarPlay.
This is the section I was referring to on the Apple support page.
Correct, but to actually answer the question… As per page 57 of this official Apple presentation, wireless CarPlay does not support lossless audio.
Also, ALAC has been around for over 17 years. It’s not new. Apple has always loved their proprietary crap. Apple Music Lossless (the service) is a recent addition, though.
Correct it doesn’t support lossless. Which is exactly what I said in my post. It supports CD quality at 16/44.1
You aren’t refuting anything I said. The whole point of my post was it maxes out at CD quality and that scientifically the human ear can’t hear higher then that anyways.
Therefore wireless CarPlay gets to the highest audio most people agree the human ear can decipher.
Wired CarPlay supports up to CD quality. Wireless does not. CD quality (Red Book standard) is lossless (two-channel, signed 16-bit LPCM at 44.1 kHz). Wireless CarPlay uses AAC-LC (“normal” AAC) for audio. AAC and all extensions of it use lossy compression so they are by definition lower quality than the audio CD standard. To put it another way, the upper limit of AAC is below the audio CD standard. Audibly transparent or close enough to it, but technically very different.
Again, I stated in my first post in this thread that it doesn’t really matter for playback. Even 128 kbps AAC is transparent to most people. A transparent lossy source is absolutely fine for the situation in question: playback in a car.
Forgive the noob BMW audio question, but was there more than one HK system available in the 2018-19 5 or 7 Series?
Source?
CD quality is only lossless if the master source was not recorded above 16/44. If it was there will be a “loss” from the original master recording when encoded at 16/44.
The fact remains that hifi sources weather Tidal or Apple Music sound infinitely better than standard sources over wireless CarPlay. I have done numerous blind tests and pick the hifi source every time.
Are you even reading my comments or just picking certain sentences to reply to?
One last time…
In my comment above (pages 56 and 57): https://devstreaming-cdn.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2016/722x2eefo3u2rp8k8qs/722/722_developing_carplay_systems_part_1.pdf
This is from 2016, but I doubt the information on those 2 slides is no longer accurate. Anyway, as per Apple:
Wired CarPlay outputs up to 48 kHz, 16-bit stereo via the LPCM codec which is identical to CD quality besides the sample rate (44.1 kHz). Wireless CarPlay uses AAC, a lossy codec, so it is incapable of lossless encoding/decoding regardless of the source. It’s also incapable of reproducing CD quality audio. Again, the difference can be inaudible, but is always very significant in a technical sense (i.e. data being discarded during compression vs no loss).
Lossless means no data is lost during compression. It has nothing to do with the recording/production process. To illustrate: a CD contains a continuous stream of data, encoded as 2 channels (stereo) of LPCM (raw or uncompressed) audio. You can choose to rip a CD to FLAC (at an identical bit depth and sample rate i.e. 16-bit/44.1 kHz). This involves lossless compression which eliminates redundancy. You end up with a smaller file size, but can reverse the process and get what you started with. You could also rip a CD to a lossy format, say MP3 at 320 kbps. Information is discarded during compression in this case. For example, lossy codecs typically cut data that represents sound above a certain frequency. As these sounds are difficult or impossible to hear, this has a minimal impact (compared to just cutting out sections of the song). As a result, the data can be compressed into a smaller size than can be achieved through lossless compression, but you cannot end up with exactly what you started with by reversing the process.
Data is lost when transcoding from a 24-bit or higher source or master to 16-bit PCM to be burned or pressed onto a CD. But nothing of consequence is lost. As has been established, CD quality is already beyond the limits of human hearing. Essentially, the only difference between various bit depths is the amount of (quantization) “noise.” Please do not think of it with terms like “resolution” or “accuracy.” The difference between 16 and 24 bit depths is the limit before digital noise interferes with the signal. Bit depths higher than 16 are absolutely worthless when it comes to playback. The point of the higher bit depths used during recording/mixing/mastering is to provide more headroom during the editing process. In short, the goal is to reduce noise and eliminate audible errors as there are destructive processes (where data is lost) involved.
To put this all into a crude analogy, think of a book. The master files used during the production process are like a one-sided manuscript. When ready for the press, you’re only losing the blank sides. Similarly, there are no audible differences between the 24-bit or higher master and the 16-bit CD; only noise is lost. Most books have ‘unnecessary’ blank pages at the front or back. Lossy compression is like ripping out those pages. Not much value is necessarily lost, but something is lost, irreversibly so. Taken further, pages with text could be cut, much like lossy compression can introduce audible differences. Lossless compression would be like reprinting the book in a smaller font. Takes up less space, but nothing is lost.
I only see 1 option for the HK system.
I have read all your posts and am asking you a reasonable question. You are speaking with authority without any evidence.
So your assertion is that Apple hasn’t updated anything on CarPlay since 2016? The hardware available to them has changed dramatically in that span and iOS has been updated many times with several large changes. Is it not reasonable that some of what was in that deck has changed?
Disagreeing with you doesn’t mean I am not reading your responses.
I am in IT and if I gave someone a spec sheet from 5 years ago to prove a point I would be laughed out of the room.
So data is lost as I asserted but since it doesn’t “matter” it is still lossless? I agree with you no one can hear the difference but to claim it is lossless when you say data is lost seems quite odd to mean when that is the antithesis of the meaning of lossless.
There are many audiophiles buying $50,000 speakers that would vehemently disagree with you about nothing being lost. I am not one of them but to claim CD is always lossless is technically wrong.
In my opinion, the worst audio source is YouTube. Instagram also greatly reduces the quality, but Instagram, thank God, is not intended for audio.
I am correcting your misinformation and misunderstood comments. I am stating technical facts, nothing more. Asking if you read my posts was my attempt at being polite, as the only option remaining is to question your comprehension. Your “sources” are just blog posts written by journalists. None of which so much as mention CarPlay, by the way. The only mention of wireless connections at all is this, which already contradicts what you keep repeating:
“Some formats such as AptxHD Bluetooth and LDAC allow for hi-res files to be streamed wirelessly between compatible devices but not without compression. The former supports audio at 24-bit/48kHz, but uses compression and has a maximum data rate of 576kbps. The latter supports up to 32-bit/96kHz over Bluetooth but only with a data rate of 990kbps. Both of these are lower than the data rate of CD (1411kbps) which isn’t technically hi-res…” (How to play hi-res music on your iPhone | What Hi-Fi?)
Now CarPlay uses wifi to steam from your phone but is limited to CD quality audio (16bit/44.1kHz)
Where is your source for this claim?
On the other hand, I have only provided official sources. Again, the only official source I can find is those slides from 2016. Please let me know if you find a more recent, contradicting source. https://developer.apple.com/carplay/
There is little reason to think that certain lines of code have changed without any direct evidence or any written notice advising developers or advertising to consumers. As has been established, there would be little benefit in terms of playback if ‘upgrading’ from a transparent lossy stream to a lossless stream. Not to mention that most consumers don’t care about or even understand the concept of lossless music. So there is no evidence that this standard has changed and no real reason for Apple to allocate resources towards making such a change.
These support posts (from 4 different employees and all very recent) suggest that my interpretation of the wording on the Apple help article is correct, i.e. no explicit statement that wireless CarPlay supports CD quality/lossless/a codec other than AAC. Again, it’s not CD quality if it’s AAC.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252851142?answerId=255366082022#255366082022
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252864177?answerId=255388329022#255388329022
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252852346?answerId=255367678022#255367678022
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252866919?answerId=255393963022#255393963022
I said “the information on those 2 slides” i.e. the specifications used to transmit data to CarPlay. Not CarPlay as a whole. There have obviously been changes to the UI and regarding app support, etc. To the point: what makes you think that they would change longstanding and still very current standards for audio playback? Does changing the engine between 2 generations of a car necessitate a redesign of the power windows or seats? No. Do you need to update your printer drivers when you update a browser or change your wallpaper? No.
Do you go around updating USB drivers or physically changing ports every couple of months or years? No. These are standards and meant to be as generic as possible (as the name suggests for USB), for wide support. There have only been 4 generations of USB in its 25-year history, and USB4 is not widely implemented/adopted yet. Did anything have to be done to USB 2.0 ports when 3.0 was introduced? No. Compatible connectors and devices still work. Upgrading to 3.0 would offer higher transfer speeds, but that’s not of any importance in scenarios such as the use of a mouse or keyboard. AAC was introduced 24 years ago. Same idea. No need for change for the use cases where it is appropriate, such as wireless audio playback in a car. They could use a lossless codec, but they don’t because there is no need to. It would be nice if they at least offered it as an option, but again, little benefit in doing that.
We’re not talking about changing the phones in your office here. Most cars on the road are not as new as our BMWs and do not get changed every 3 years. Even if that were the case, there would still be no need and little reason to ‘upgrade’ from AAC to a lossless codec. Unless I haven’t heard the news about recent generational leaps in wireless transmitting or processing data or audio standards…? To reiterate: the hardware environment has changed somewhat, but not in a way that matters as far as wireless audio transmission and playback goes. Existing, transparent if lossy codecs such as AAC are perfectly fine and will remain suitable for the task for the foreseeable future.
uncompressed files (FLAC etc).
FLAC is by nature and by definition compressed. https://xiph.org/flac/
Clearly, you don’t understand the concept of lossless encoding/compression or how it relates to CDs. When you transcode from A format with X specifications to B format with Y specifications, you are either adding or deleting bits. Data is lost if transcoding down from a ‘higher quality’ source in order to fit on a CD. The data on the CD itself is considered lossless as it is encoded in LPCM. You can “rip” or copy the data without losing any of it (using a lossless codec, either as raw or uncompressed PCM or WAV or compressed via FLAC or similar). That’s the point. No data is lost from lossless encoding. The term lossless does not refer to the production process. If the data on CDs were encoded in MP3, they would be lossy; there is always data lost when encoding to MP3. It has nothing to do with the “original” data.
Here are some Wikipedia article for easy reading. Please take the time to understand concepts before you comment on them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_compression
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_loss
Tried Apple’s lossless and not that impressed, at least in an audiophile setting. Way more clarity, soundstage, and detail using Tidal on Roon. Plus Roon’s system provides way more customization and is easier to use. Currently streaming from a Mac Mini to a Schiit Modius and Magnuis stack with HiFi 400i headphones. No real difference using CarPlay between Tidal and Apple given that the wireless system caps them. Too bad I can’t use USB to stream music while getting Waze on the iDrive screen.
You would be correct since I have never heard of it. I have spent some time on the Roon forum when I was trying to set up a Raspberry Pi and eventually gave up but that is it.
Has anyone switched from HK to Bavsound here ? 
As crazy as it may sound but I have tried almost everything to make the quality better on the new 5 series but the its sounds like a knock off system 
.
The primary issue appears to be the underpowered HK amp. I did the BavSound HK S1 swap on my G05 earlier and was very disappointed (while SUV vs sedan acoustics are of course quite different, I’ll just give the comparative take). I should also add that I initially was a big fan, though I quickly realized that the improvements had more to do with the dynamatting vs the BavSound units.
With the BavSound speakers alone, I wouldn’t expect anything earth shatteringly different, especially not for a few weeks until they burn in. Post burn in, they definitely open up more, but things still fall apart very quickly on punchier tracks at mid volume or pretty much anything classical.
I ended up going with a powered 6.2 kit by Focal (https://www.focal-inside.com/bmw/en/bmw-serie-x5-suv-2018-g05-2/), and absolutely loved the results there. Now in the F95 I got the B&W, which again, by virtue primarily of the much higher powered amp (and the pretty speaker lights 
) certainly holds its own, though I’m not entirely sold on the 4k pricepoint. But with the shortages, I’m sure they could even push it to 6k and have takers these days. 
Oddly enough, I didn’t see the 8/M8 listed on either BavSound or Focal’s websites, which strikes me as a bit odd, but you may want to double check that they have a kit specifically for you.
Edit: also, just came across a very timely thread on BimmerPost (Bavsound…so underwhelmed… Bavsound....so underwhelmed...)
It’s better than the Ali express kit you almost bought 
