Bluetooth or Wireless?

Bob H wrote:
I thought that a cabless speaker was either Wireless or Bluetooth, but I
see that bluetooth is also wireless, as per this:

Bluetooth adapter is capable of wireless transition within 33feet(10m)
from he
http://www.portablehifi.com/best-blu...adapter-guide/

So is that strictly true, as I have been looking at both Wireless
speakers and Bluetooth speakers, which according to the above is also
wireless.

So between the 2, which has the best range, and also transmitting
through walls etc.
I have read somewhere that bluetooth has to be basically in line of
sight, but wireless does not.

Another opinion:
"Wireless" can mean anything that does not require wires
however it often means Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.
Wifi typically has greater range than bluetooth.
In my experience, bluetooth is good for a few feet, like for
keyboards and mice. Wifi is good for tens of feet under normal
inside building conditions.
If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.
Don't turn up the power to one watt unless you want to broadcast
across town.

On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

Bob H wrote:
I thought that a cabless speaker was either Wireless or Bluetooth, but I
see that bluetooth is also wireless, as per this:

Bluetooth adapter is capable of wireless transition within 33feet(10m)
from he
http://www.portablehifi.com/best-blu...adapter-guide/

So is that strictly true, as I have been looking at both Wireless
speakers and Bluetooth speakers, which according to the above is also
wireless.

So between the 2, which has the best range, and also transmitting
through walls etc.
I have read somewhere that bluetooth has to be basically in line of
sight, but wireless does not.

Another opinion:
"Wireless" can mean anything that does not require wires
however it often means Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.
Wifi typically has greater range than bluetooth.
In my experience, bluetooth is good for a few feet, like for
keyboards and mice. Wifi is good for tens of feet under normal
inside building conditions.
If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.
Don't turn up the power to one watt unless you want to broadcast
across town.

Do you have any radio experience? I do. And I was licensed!
Now if that town of yours is maybe a half mile wide, yeah you might get
across town on a good day with one watt.
A high school radio I was chief engineer at, our little old 10 watt FM
staton maybe got 20 miles.
Why do you think all those big time commercial FM stations and TV stations
transmit in MEGA watts?

The higher the frequency, the more power you need to transmit even one
mile.
So even a one watt wifi transmitter might get you a mile.

To improve the signal, what you really need is a high gain antenna system.
A small yagi antenna will transmit quite aways without loss.

richard wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

Bob H wrote:
I thought that a cabless speaker was either Wireless or Bluetooth, but I
see that bluetooth is also wireless, as per this:

Bluetooth adapter is capable of wireless transition within 33feet(10m)
from he
http://www.portablehifi.com/best-blu...adapter-guide/

So is that strictly true, as I have been looking at both Wireless
speakers and Bluetooth speakers, which according to the above is also
wireless.

So between the 2, which has the best range, and also transmitting
through walls etc.
I have read somewhere that bluetooth has to be basically in line of
sight, but wireless does not.
Another opinion:
"Wireless" can mean anything that does not require wires
however it often means Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.
Wifi typically has greater range than bluetooth.
In my experience, bluetooth is good for a few feet, like for
keyboards and mice. Wifi is good for tens of feet under normal
inside building conditions.
If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.
Don't turn up the power to one watt unless you want to broadcast
across town.

Do you have any radio experience? I do. And I was licensed!
Now if that town of yours is maybe a half mile wide, yeah you might get
across town on a good day with one watt.
A high school radio I was chief engineer at, our little old 10 watt FM
staton maybe got 20 miles.
Why do you think all those big time commercial FM stations and TV stations
transmit in MEGA watts?

The higher the frequency, the more power you need to transmit even one
mile.
So even a one watt wifi transmitter might get you a mile.

To improve the signal, what you really need is a high gain antenna system.
A small yagi antenna will transmit quite aways without loss.

Allow some leeway for humor!
I used to have a ham license... a long time ago.
My job often has me setting up cellular and mesh networking equipment.
Usually Digi or Avalan with a 1/4 wave whip antenna, sometimes with
a yagi or planar antenna if necessary to make use of fresnel effect.
900mhz or 2400 mhz, RS-232/422, GSM, CDMA, SMS burst.
A 100 mw planar at 2.4 will go at least 1/4 mile and through two
non-metal building walls.
We don't transmit music though, just data bursts.

On 28/09/2014 19:47, richard wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

Bob H wrote:
I thought that a cabless speaker was either Wireless or Bluetooth, but I
see that bluetooth is also wireless, as per this:

Bluetooth adapter is capable of wireless transition within 33feet(10m)
from he
http://www.portablehifi.com/best-blu...adapter-guide/

So is that strictly true, as I have been looking at both Wireless
speakers and Bluetooth speakers, which according to the above is also
wireless.

So between the 2, which has the best range, and also transmitting
through walls etc.
I have read somewhere that bluetooth has to be basically in line of
sight, but wireless does not.

Another opinion:
"Wireless" can mean anything that does not require wires
however it often means Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.
Wifi typically has greater range than bluetooth.
In my experience, bluetooth is good for a few feet, like for
keyboards and mice. Wifi is good for tens of feet under normal
inside building conditions.
If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.
Don't turn up the power to one watt unless you want to broadcast
across town.

Do you have any radio experience? I do. And I was licensed!
Now if that town of yours is maybe a half mile wide, yeah you might get
across town on a good day with one watt.
A high school radio I was chief engineer at, our little old 10 watt FM
staton maybe got 20 miles.
Why do you think all those big time commercial FM stations and TV stations
transmit in MEGA watts?

The higher the frequency, the more power you need to transmit even one
mile.
So even a one watt wifi transmitter might get you a mile.

To improve the signal, what you really need is a high gain antenna system.
A small yagi antenna will transmit quite aways without loss.


I am an ex Ham Radio operator with a G4 licence, and know exactly what
you are talking about.

On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:38:55 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

richard wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

Bob H wrote:

....

equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.
Don't turn up the power to one watt unless you want to broadcast
across town.

Do you have any radio experience? I do. And I was licensed!
Now if that town of yours is maybe a half mile wide, yeah you might get
across town on a good day with one watt.
A high school radio I was chief engineer at, our little old 10 watt FM
staton maybe got 20 miles.
Why do you think all those big time commercial FM stations and TV stations
transmit in MEGA watts?

The higher the frequency, the more power you need to transmit even one
mile.
So even a one watt wifi transmitter might get you a mile.

To improve the signal, what you really need is a high gain antenna system.
A small yagi antenna will transmit quite aways without loss.

Allow some leeway for humor!

Exactly...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.

Which consumer gear uses the 60 GHz band?

--

Char Jackson

Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.

Which consumer gear uses the 60 GHz band?


Wow, it's mentioned here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11

IEEE 802.11 is a set of MAC/PHY specifications for implementing wireless...
computer communication in the 2.4, 3.6, 5 and 60 GHz frequency bands.

Never heard of the 3.6. I'd seen something about the 60GHz, but I don't
know if that is in production, or is just a dream. The 60Ghz would
likely be line of sight.

The 60GHz link takes me here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ad

"The 60 GHz signal cannot typically penetrate walls but can
propagate off reflections from walls, ceilings, floors and objects
using beamforming built into the WiGig system."

So I guess that is today's version of the wireless monitor solution.

"On September 9, 2013, a statement revealed that the WiGig protocol
would be used in a new wireless version of USB through a deal between
the Wi-Fi Alliance and the USB Implementers Forum."

It's going to take less and less time, to cook that bag of microwave
popcorn.

"WiGig Display Extension

* Supports wireless transmission of audio/visual data"

Good times.

Paul

Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.

Which consumer gear uses the 60 GHz band?

Nothing much yet for consumers. From what I read the standards are not
yet standardized. It's beginning though:
http://www.dvdo.com/documents/DVDO/D...eet_040212.pdf

Paul wrote:
Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:53:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

If you want HiFi wifi, then go with 802.11n or .11a(-) specs and get
equipment with multiple external antennas. 5 ghz is better for
fidelity and noise rejection than 2.4 ghz. 60 ghz is even better.

Which consumer gear uses the 60 GHz band?


Wow, it's mentioned here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11

IEEE 802.11 is a set of MAC/PHY specifications for implementing
wireless...
computer communication in the 2.4, 3.6, 5 and 60 GHz frequency bands.

Never heard of the 3.6. I'd seen something about the 60GHz, but I don't
know if that is in production, or is just a dream. The 60Ghz would
likely be line of sight.

The 60GHz link takes me here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ad

"The 60 GHz signal cannot typically penetrate walls but can
propagate off reflections from walls, ceilings, floors and objects
using beamforming built into the WiGig system."

So I guess that is today's version of the wireless monitor solution.

"On September 9, 2013, a statement revealed that the WiGig protocol
would be used in a new wireless version of USB through a deal between
the Wi-Fi Alliance and the USB Implementers Forum."

It's going to take less and less time, to cook that bag of microwave
popcorn.

"WiGig Display Extension

* Supports wireless transmission of audio/visual data"

Good times.

Paul

Do-it-yourself millimeter wave scanner!