Try the Jay birdgear. much better then all three of those and they have a good athletic feel.

maybe it never got a chance. the tech world is constantly changong and people always want the new. So, if the bluetooth earphones didn' tadvance with the gadgets, then it won't catch on. People never gave it a chance, they shot the bluetooth earphones down before they had a chance in the market.

http://ziggytek.com/

Glad to see this article. Thanks.

Personally, I love the design fit and comfort of my old Motorola S9's - (though the set up is really fiddly).

What drives me nuts is the unreliability of the connection. From my phone (a samsung something or other) the connection is very dependant on where the phone is, and it rarely works when the phone is in any of my pockets. I have the same issue with a pc bluetooth dongle (an AZiO BTD-V201)

Also, I swear that after it drops a few seconds, the music speeds up and chnages pitch as the stream tries to catch up.

I can't until etymotic gets in on this game - they have a phone headset, but not a stereo music headset - yet.

I was pretty disappointed with stereo Bluetooth when I tried a dongle device a while back. I also experienced the problem Lt Kije described where audio playback would constantly speed up and slow down, changing the pitch and timing of the music I wanted to listen to.

After that experience, I learned that Bluetooth doesn't really have enough bandwidth to carry uncompressed audio. In theory, you could chuck MP3 data frames almost directly out into the aether and the headphones could decode it, but lots of systems will have to re-encode the audio before it goes out (like with me and my Ogg Vorbis music collection).

I'd recommend people use non-Bluetooth methods for getting wireless audio, but I can only go by my own experiences. Maybe things have improved since the last time I tried.

I'm looking forward to the bluetooth earbuds for my bike rides. I would only need them for 2 - 2 1/2 hours per day so it's not like I need them for the entire day as far as battery life is concerned. Lag time wouldn't matter with a mp3 player for me especially when I don't have to look at the player.

I would just rather not have to worry about wires being pulled and then have the earbuds being ripped out of my ears with force.

Like I need one more thing to to keep with me and keep the battery charged as well. The headset needs to be a part of the device and charged at the same time. I don't have to worry about my wired headphones battery dieing.

They also get a bad rep from movies since the easiest way to portray someone as a corporate cog in a machine is to stick a headset in their ear.

I'm still very happy with my Logitech wireless headphones. Been using them for years. Now I can connect with my iPHone without the additional transmitter/receiver thing.

I have tried a few bluetooth earphones. The biggest problem is that none of them fit. It's like the mfg thinks every person has the same size ear!! Call me Dumbo, but none fit my ears. My ideal blue tooth earphone would hang over the ear and have a short cord going to ear buds that fit into my ear with noise canceling buds!

Bluetooth 3.0 may improve some of the data transfer speeds and improve lag, assuming they optimize it's potential. Wireless anything sucks power. Improvements in the batteries themselves is the answer here and in everything else we use that holds a charge.

Has any tried the Sleek SA-6 wireless earbuds? They're not Bluetooth (something else proprietary I imagine), but I think they are pretty good and I’ve never had any lag (movies, games, or audio). I received my pair last October as a gift and I can’t live without them. I get about 40 feet from the transmitter with no dropouts; which means at the office I can walk around and still enjoy my music. The only drawback is the price. They are NOT cheap…

The REAL question is...why don't we have bluetooth TV REMOTES yet? ;;

The REAL question is...why don't we have bluetooth TV REMOTES yet? ;;

I'd like a decent volume on these things. While at ComicCon, the crowds get LOUD, and any attempt at hearing what is being said by my fellow ner- I mean, fans is lost as I make my way to more swag.

That, and better controls for the music. :)

Dear Shifter: Peter
I hate to sound like the voice of sanity here, but I'm actually want to sound the voice of mental health. Yeah, regardless of all of the consumer feature concerns you display in your seminal article/hands on, I think the real reason any of us should restrain from listening to "long" stream of music on Bluetooth stereo or even mono ear piece is that it uses the 2.4 GHz band. Ironically this band is called "an industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) radio band" because any of these applications can use this band for "un"-licensed devices. However the widest used device in that band is the "microwave oven", yep the water energy transfering device that heats up the water using electromagnetic radiation's power. Well, the same electromagnetic energy we use in every cell phone and base station around us. But the keyword here is "Energy", the more you get the more you heat up. It seems like that water absorbs the energy at 2.45GHz better than the lower ones used in mobile telecomm. However I got no scientific data on that. Oh, and to make the mud slipperier also the "un"licensed WiFi uses it. So if you expose your water filled body to the power of an emitting device like your home WiFi router or your beloved music transfering ear buds or headset that surrounds your favorite skull, then you add up energy over the time you use these devices. So what I advice my dearest friends to do is to turn off their Bluetooth earpiece if they don't use it. Unfortunately WiFi router manufacturers keep denying my prayers to put a hardware switch to close WiFi only when you don't use it, so I'm actually cooking my dearest persons of my family in my own house on a very gentle fire. Probably, a bit stronger than the fire wireless music lovers cook their brains on.
Bottom line is I wish no music BT headsets are ever used without the clear warning of the consumer. And maybe more research for the effects on different human tissues conducted independent of the wireless industry sponsorship. And maybe the developement of a safer technology which in my belief could be the coded FM transmission that could be more useful and versatile than Bluetooth.
Of course that does not mean regular headsets with their simple almost static magnetic field (NOT EM radiation) could be non dangerous to human body, but maybe less dangerous.
Keep on mobile and turn off your Bluetooth unless you phone someone. Use non magnetic/ear bud speakers to enjoy beautiful sounds... and live well and prosper

Hey TV lover checkout the wireless TV remote controls. I guess Logitech answered your prayers long ago. Knock yourself out.

I've never had a Bluetooth gadget: phone handsfree, Logitech remote, whatever, that didn't drop out at least daily. They are all crap, and I won't buy any more until I see something that convinces me it won't drop out.

A simple solution that would have to be built into the devices themselves (And not the headphones) would be a setting for delaying the image on the screen to sync it to the sound. Admittedly, this would only really help for watching movies / TV and would probably only further irritate you if you tried to play a game with it. Either way, its halfway to being a useful idea.

I would like bluetooth mp3 player also. Not on phone either. Something with a good battery life and cheap. I saw nothing close to this on ebay. Sounds like a good product idea to make $$$$.

@ Floyd, I'm glad you're enjoying your Sleek Audio SA6 wireless earbuds. The technology used is NOT Bluetooth and is a proprietary technology called Kleer (www.kleer.com). This uncompressed, lossless, CD-quality wireless audio technology is also used in the Sennheiser MX W1 true wireless earbuds, the DigiFi Opera wireless earbuds products, and the CyFi wireless bicycle speaker. Other advantages of products that use Kleer is the low battery usage, meaning you can get up to 10 hours listening time, low latency, and excellent ISM band co-existence so that you can listen to music with Wi-Fi and other wireless products running. And as you noticed, range is 40 feet so you can get quite far from the transmitter connected to your iPod, MP3 player, anything with a 3.5mm stereo jack.

I have a pair of logitech bluetooth headphones. AND I LOVE them. I use them everyday on the train to work. I usually get 3-4 days of train rides on a single charge. I'll never use corded headphones again. I can't tell you how many times my cord would get stuck on something and send my iPod flying making me look like an even bigger tool than I usually do!

The audio on Bluetooth stereo headphones is improving. For example, Sennheiser are about to release a range for stereo headsets with Bluetooth (MM400 / MM450) that support a high-quality audio experience.

Moving forward proprietary wireless technologies such a Kleer will disappear.

They do have blue tooth headphones as an attachment. One side connects to your headphones, the other to your music player. when you get a phone call the unit interrupts and patches in your voice call. The mic is on the bluetooth dongle.

The reason you don't see it in headphones as 1) not everybody wants it 2) It would add to the cost of your headsets

Let me just say that iPhone is NOT a good device to test bluetooth stereo headphones. Not only took them "x" years to FINALLY include A2DP protocol in their so called "music device" , but still forgot to add AVRCP protocol to go along with it (mind you, we're talking 4-5 year old technology here!). Shoddy implementation steers me away from considering iPhone as a "bluetooth device" - it's like considering 50cc scooter to be a motorcycle. Please, repeat the test on a Bluetooth device with good transmitters, supporting the whole array of protocols (yes, there's many), and report back.

Kudos to SmartEng! I have read a number of places that 2.4 GHZ is the resonant frequency of water. Your body is mostly water. Why people wear bluetooths for hours on end nuking themselves is beyond me. Could explain the low IQ's these days.

@SmartEng and @Advantus

By your logic, ANY person that used a bluetooth whatever would have combusted by now.

Do you have any more F.U.D. to dispense today?

As for my experiences, I just picked up a Motorola headset and while the quality of sound is comparable to cheap earphones, the cordless freedom makes up for it.

But to address the issues raised by @SmartEng and @Advantus: the industries involved deem the use of the radio transmitters on our bodies safe because they want to gradually change our molecular make-up and turn us into advanced humans more resilient than a cockroach. All the people who don't use bluetooth devices or cellphones, or microwave ovens will become more susceptible to infectious diseases and before you know it, the will all become zombies and the Umbrella corporation will be handing out bluetooth-enabled cellphones with pizza-zapping powers faster than you can say George Andrew Romero.

So you have to ask your self a question.
Do I want to become a flesh-eating zombie because I didn't upgrade my molecular make-up with a microwave device? Or do I want to become lone 'n rogue zombie killer with bluetooth-enabled remote laser canon strapped to bluetooth-tattooed chiseled hard-bod?

Well do ya, punk?

Oh crap, my ears are heating up, and I'm getting hotter. I'm boiling and melting at the same time!!! Oh, these bluetooth headphones are gonna expl...

"While Bluetooth earpieces for phones have become as common as Crocs", nope not everyone has them nor wants them. If you do some research outside the U.S., the alarming rate of cancers, etc. related to standard cell phone use is high and climbing. Why would you want to exponentially increase it by having a wireless device next to your brain all the time??? There's a reason cops don't lay radar guns in their laps anymore :) Skip the wireless and protect your health.

I'm mostly repeating what's already been said but, just in case the manufacturers are listening, here are my gripes to drive the point home.:

1) Microphones: stereo sets (buds or cans) tend to be great for music and lousy for the recipient of a phone conversation. I have Motorola S9-HD buds and they desperately need a flip-down microphone with some noise cancelling for my voice. Everyone thinks I'm talking in a tunnel.
2) Battery life. My S9-HDs are good for 6 hours but I use them at work and need 8-10 hours. At least let me charge them while using them! Yeah, that's not wireless but at least I won't yank my phone off the desk if I stand up and forget to disconnect. I also wouldn't have minded if they used a bigger battery or allowed me to change it out with a spare.
3) Comfort. My S9-HDs are actually quite comfortable but the part in back that holds the battery and radio gets in the way if I lean back into my headrest. I've heated and bent mine a bit to move them further down toward my neck to solve this.
4) Sound quality. I'm actually pretty happy with my S9-HDs for incoming sound quality and I like the bass response I get out of the buds. Many stereo sets sound terrible so they make me wonder why they even exist.
5) Bluetooth itself is flawed. Bandwidth is only half the problem but seems to be the reason sound quality can suffer. The other problem is that it effectively requires line-of-site or a wall to reflect signals off. This is why ANY bluetooth set doesn't work well outside unless the phone and headset can "see" each other. Either a better radio frequency needs to be used or the headset people need to figure out how to make the radio stronger or movable. Ironically, indoors, I can walk beyond 30 feet, around two corners, and even close the door (to the bathroom) and still get the signal most of the time. It seems to drop only when other people are walking through the signal path.

A rebuttal to SmartEng:

1. Microwave ovens operate at 2.45 GHz; this is not the resonant frequency of water (you aren't the only one with this misunderstanding, though).
2. Bluetooth devices are not nearly powerful enough to heat water- most microwaves use 700 watts of power. I quickly calculated a typical Bluetooth headset as using less than .16 Watts. That means a microwave is more than 4,000 times as powerful.
3. Its hard for me to refute your statement about magnets because you don't explain it. But if magnets cause health problems -- God help us all! Motors, TVs, Speakers, MRIs, THE EARTH...

Please do not spread that bunk-- you are inhibiting perfectly good technology. If you have to worry-- maybe concentrate on something real like the Freemasons or the year 2012.

Following up on Bopp's comment on power, the 0.16W is the power consumed by running the chip. The radio transmit power is typically only 4mW and that's at a low duty cycle as most of the time it's receiving, not transmitting.

So the microwave is around a million times more powerful.

I love my Bluetooth stereo headphones. But, I admit they're a hybrid of my own creation. A few years ago I bought a pair of Motorola contour fit earbud-type, but with the band behind the head. Stays on the head extremely well and comfortable to wear. I can't use traditional earbuds because they just don't stay in my ears. The transmitter was apparently the problem because the connection between it and the headphones was erratic. A couple of years later I bought the Sony version, but did not like the headset itself. Small ordinary type headphone that covers the ear and didn't stay on my head. But alas! The transmitter, I found, worked with the Motorola set and voila! I just love 'em. iPod in the pocket, no wire, stroll through the supermarket or make the subway ride to Yankee Stadium more tolerable.

@Advantus and @anna
Thanks for your support.

@Bopp
Thanks for your response but here is my response to your rebuttal, hoping for better explanation of my comment:
1-I never said 2.45GHz is a resonant frequency for water. However it seems the energy absorption rate at this frequency is higher than the cell phone technology frequencies (approximately range from 0.8 to 1.2GHz). But you're right it's commonly misinformed that 2.45GHz is a resonant frequency of water (c.f. Advantus' comment ). Still you and I don't know for sure if this is a resonance frequency of one or more of our body/head tissue. Our body contains a lot of water but not only water.
2- I never mentioned the "power" of the EM wave to be the cause of heating. I deliberately put "energy" between quotes, that is the accumulation of power over time. You are probably right in your high estimate of the ratio of powers between microwave ovens and bluetooth headset, but you mistakenly over sighted two factors: time and place. Your microwave oven heats food in few minutes, while you wear your bluetooth earpiece long working hours or maybe all day, everyday. That's a lot of energy accumulation and literally in touch with your skin, unlike the oven that you leave in the kitchen. I did not say that communication engineers are monsters try to cook our brains with microwaves. They design the headsets to use less power and less time intervals to minimize the "risk" of heating. But if you like to be a guinea rat or your newly born baby, who has less Calcium in his/her skull to block radiation less than rock headed grownups, may you like to expose yourself (choose the part of your body you like to get Cancer in) to your microwave oven for just a minute every time you use it. Then wait to see if you catch Cancer. This however is no guarantee but you will be more prone to it. The expedited rate of microwave heating may be as dangerous as long term process as our Professors explain the integration over time. With listening to music for longer hours than you talk though, you force the headset to be in higher level power communication mode all the time unlike when you only receive a call for couple of minutes. That elevates the power of radiation higher than the standby mode when you're not using the headset.
3-Of course we all seek God's help all the time. Natural disasters happen all the time. Cosmic radiation, or what's left of it after the Earth protecting atmosphere, is bombarding our skin. But what we do to avoid skin cancer? We wear sunscreen as a precaution when we are out under the sun. As I explained the bad effect of proximity in the previous point: magnets that are close to our body disturb the balance of our magnetic field and reduce immunity of the body part that is exposed for long time and/or strong static magnetic field. These are not my words, I heard them from a Biology Professor in one scientific show. As for motors, TV's, MRI's and regular speakers, they are not to close to your body for long time. However if you believe in God you'd believe that He created us to tolerate the Earth's magnetic as well as Electric field (in case you don't know there's one) with our body's physiology. However you hear electric power people warn the public not to live or pass under High Voltage transfer lines. All I want from manufacturers is to raise people awareness for potential abuse of useful devices and leave the decision to consumer. As I recall one show in UK was showing a woman filing a lawsuit against her late husband's firm for compensation after her lefty man died of Cancer in the left lobe of the brain. This unlucky guy was using the company's cell phone for long hours back in the days when older generation cell phones needed more power to communicate effectively. Now that we move to 3G and 4G networks maybe one simple solution is to increase power of radiation to ensure no dropped calls. That's why representatives should be aware of what affects people's health and that's why I demand more influence independent scientific experiments on radiation effects on man.

If you need to worry Bopp about something real then worry about Snow J. Frost. The Snowman's head melt even before I but a carrot for his nose. That's one lost cause anyway, what about Palestine, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq and different parts of the world under war? Unfortunately I cannot help people there with my words here, but I wanted to give heads-up to tech-lovers who read Dvice.com. Live well and prosper.

on dj's comment about Bluetooth range

Having worked with Bluetooth professionally at Nokia for a long time I have to correct you statement that Bluetooth requires line-of-sight. Bluetooth works perfectly well if both ends have decent antenna designs and state-of-the art chips on both ends in free space even if your body is between phone and Bluetooth headset.

However, it is correct that many old implementations suffer from bad antennae implementations and thus exhibit problems in practice. If you use e.g. a Nokia BH-214 with a decent phone you should be OK. Unfortunately it is not possible to tell easily whether a particular phone has a decent Bluetooth implementation ... you may want to try first.

And by the way, the BH-214 comes with good in-ear headphones but can be used as well with your personal favorite headphone since it has a 3.5mm jack.

A technical question to OJJ

I assume that BH-214 supports decoding of mp3 without the need for the source to decode and repack the sound? Another question wouldbe that does N900 support mp3 streaming over A2DP? I tried Nokia N95 with BF-500 and apparently one of them (N95?) does not support the mp3 streaming since the music had extra distortion, changing of pitch etc. problems.