ASUS STRIX X570-E Gaming review
EK Classic RGB P240 review
Promo: VIP-SCDKey Games and Windows 10 / Office
Synology DS620slim Gigabit NAS Review
Fractal Design Vector RS review
Corsair iCUE 465X review
be quiet! Pure Base 500 review
Borderlands 3: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Swiftech H240 X3 AIO review
Promo: URCDKey Autumn Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Valve activates bluetooth in Steam Controller
Yeah, you didn't know it had it right? Valve released a beta version of the Steam Client, this update enabled Bluetooth Low Energy functionality for the Steam Controller. You can use it to connect the controller to devices without a USB port.
The Steam Client Beta includes the option to add Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) functionality to your Steam Controller. This feature will be required to enjoy the upcoming Steam Link app, but you may find it handy for other reasons, too. I’d like to describe what this BLE connection can and cannot do compared to the existing wireless solution, steps to update your controller to add BLE support, and how to switch between wireless modes once the update is installed.
When is it a good idea to use Bluetooth?
You definitely want to use the BLE connection when
- Streaming games to your iOS and Android devices with the Steam Link app.
- Connecting your Steam Controller to a tablet or laptop without a USB port.
- You just can't find your Steam Controller Wireless Receiver.
Otherwise we suggesting sticking with the original protocol. It provides the fastest connection, with low-latency support for up to four controllers per receiver, and works across all major operating systems. The BLE connection is excellent, but the native wireless protocol was designed from the ground up to provide the best experience for a Steam Controller. This update adds Bluetooth support; the original wireless mode is still available. If you have successfully paired to your Wireless Receiver and connected to your device over BLE, your Steam Controller is capable of switching between these modes.
More info here.
Tripkebab
Senior Member
Posts: 137
Joined: 2011-01-30
Senior Member
Posts: 137
Joined: 2011-01-30
#5546522 Posted on: 05/14/2018 10:54 AM
Obviously because they are now allowing you to stream to mobile device..
Obviously because they are now allowing you to stream to mobile device..
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9691
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9691
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5546525 Posted on: 05/14/2018 11:06 AM
I already set up VPN. So steam thinks that I am on one network wherever I am.
I already set up VPN. So steam thinks that I am on one network wherever I am.
Neo Cyrus
Senior Member
Posts: 9201
Joined: 2006-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 9201
Joined: 2006-02-14
#5546576 Posted on: 05/14/2018 02:24 PM
Seriously, wtf? I always just assumed it had working Bluetooth from the start. I would have been furious if I bought one.
The stream controllers have been out for...how long? and they are now just activating the bluetooth in it?.......alright...?
Seriously, wtf? I always just assumed it had working Bluetooth from the start. I would have been furious if I bought one.
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5546579 Posted on: 05/14/2018 02:27 PM
My question... why would they not activate this from the start, as it's a selling point of a controller to be run wireless?
My question... why would they not activate this from the start, as it's a selling point of a controller to be run wireless?
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9691
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9691
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5546582 Posted on: 05/14/2018 02:31 PM
It was wireless anyway. They likely considered their own communication protocol superior in every aspect.
Or maybe they wanted to prevent confusion due to having 2 modes.
My question... why would they not activate this from the start, as it's a selling point of a controller to be run wireless?
It was wireless anyway. They likely considered their own communication protocol superior in every aspect.
Or maybe they wanted to prevent confusion due to having 2 modes.
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10628
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5546583 Posted on: 05/14/2018 02:32 PM
It was wireless anyway. They likely considered their own communication protocol superior in every aspect.
Or maybe they wanted to prevent confusion due to having 2 modes.
Oh okay I missed that, thanks for clarifying.
It was wireless anyway. They likely considered their own communication protocol superior in every aspect.
Or maybe they wanted to prevent confusion due to having 2 modes.
Oh okay I missed that, thanks for clarifying.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5546609 Posted on: 05/14/2018 03:37 PM
This doesn't make sense no matter which way you look at it. If they thought their own communication protocol was so superior, why would they ever bother including Bluetooth? If they didn't think this way, why didn't they just take the simple and easy way out where they only ship Bluetooth? I also don't get why they would keep Bluetooth "hidden" after all this time.
This doesn't make sense no matter which way you look at it. If they thought their own communication protocol was so superior, why would they ever bother including Bluetooth? If they didn't think this way, why didn't they just take the simple and easy way out where they only ship Bluetooth? I also don't get why they would keep Bluetooth "hidden" after all this time.
tunejunky
Senior Member
Posts: 881
Joined: 2017-08-18
Senior Member
Posts: 881
Joined: 2017-08-18
#5546651 Posted on: 05/14/2018 05:18 PM
bluetooth is an open unlocked door into your house. granted, the range is short, but the exposure is huge.
i have a steam controller and their protocols are *superior* in every way to bluetooth.
bluetooth is a pox on technology...where you pay extra for CRAP audio and easy exploits.
bluetooth is an open unlocked door into your house. granted, the range is short, but the exposure is huge.
i have a steam controller and their protocols are *superior* in every way to bluetooth.
bluetooth is a pox on technology...where you pay extra for CRAP audio and easy exploits.
tunejunky
Senior Member
Posts: 881
Joined: 2017-08-18
Senior Member
Posts: 881
Joined: 2017-08-18
#5546652 Posted on: 05/14/2018 05:21 PM
bluetooth is an open unlocked door into your house. granted, the range is short, but the exposure is huge.
i have a steam controller and their protocols are *superior* in every way to bluetooth.
bluetooth is a pox on technology...where you pay extra for CRAP audio and easy exploits.
and by CRAP audio, i mean SiriusXM sounds better than bluetooth...and that isn't a high standard. i *need* 20Hz-20kHz at 110db or better dynamic range, ideally bit perfect or at least Flac.
bluetooth is an open unlocked door into your house. granted, the range is short, but the exposure is huge.
i have a steam controller and their protocols are *superior* in every way to bluetooth.
bluetooth is a pox on technology...where you pay extra for CRAP audio and easy exploits.
and by CRAP audio, i mean SiriusXM sounds better than bluetooth...and that isn't a high standard. i *need* 20Hz-20kHz at 110db or better dynamic range, ideally bit perfect or at least Flac.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5546657 Posted on: 05/14/2018 05:43 PM
Not really, you have to try pretty hard to make Bluetooth a security threat to you. You should really only be afraid of being vulnerable if all of the following are true:
* You use 0000 or 1234 for your PIN
* You set your device to be always visible
* You deliberately have all your personal files shared and accessible via Bluetooth
* You use high-power mode, which can extend your range beyond 10 meters
But really, in the unlikely event someone hacks into the datastream of my gamepad, why should I care? They can't get any useful data out of it, so worst case scenario, they add a few unwanted inputs here and there and I lose the game. It'd be so subtle that I'd likely just blame the problem on signal interference.
The only time Bluetooth's security is questionable is when using it for phone calls or keyboards.
Pay extra for what? Bluetooth is dirt cheap, and free to use. As for quality, that depends entirely on both the receiver and transmitter. To my understanding, most devices can go up to 320Kbps, which is plenty good enough (and to my understanding, higher than XM). Some devices can go even higher, if they have the compatible codecs and protocols. If you're transmitting both mic and mono speaker, the quality is always atrocious.
My Android phone's stereo Bluetooth audio is total garbage - sounds close to 64Kbps. But my old "dumbphone" can stream Bluetooth audio with hardly any discernible quality loss in my car's stereo. The point is: not all BT audio devices are equal.
bluetooth is an open unlocked door into your house. granted, the range is short, but the exposure is huge.
Not really, you have to try pretty hard to make Bluetooth a security threat to you. You should really only be afraid of being vulnerable if all of the following are true:
* You use 0000 or 1234 for your PIN
* You set your device to be always visible
* You deliberately have all your personal files shared and accessible via Bluetooth
* You use high-power mode, which can extend your range beyond 10 meters
But really, in the unlikely event someone hacks into the datastream of my gamepad, why should I care? They can't get any useful data out of it, so worst case scenario, they add a few unwanted inputs here and there and I lose the game. It'd be so subtle that I'd likely just blame the problem on signal interference.
The only time Bluetooth's security is questionable is when using it for phone calls or keyboards.
bluetooth is a pox on technology...where you pay extra for CRAP audio and easy exploits.
Pay extra for what? Bluetooth is dirt cheap, and free to use. As for quality, that depends entirely on both the receiver and transmitter. To my understanding, most devices can go up to 320Kbps, which is plenty good enough (and to my understanding, higher than XM). Some devices can go even higher, if they have the compatible codecs and protocols. If you're transmitting both mic and mono speaker, the quality is always atrocious.
My Android phone's stereo Bluetooth audio is total garbage - sounds close to 64Kbps. But my old "dumbphone" can stream Bluetooth audio with hardly any discernible quality loss in my car's stereo. The point is: not all BT audio devices are equal.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 12315
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 12315
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5546659 Posted on: 05/14/2018 05:52 PM
aptX-HD and LDAC both support 20-20kHz at 120db DR over bluetooth - now whether all devices/iems/headphones/etc support that is another story.
I can't really think of a reason you'd want lossless streaming over bluetooth.
and by CRAP audio, i mean SiriusXM sounds better than bluetooth...and that isn't a high standard. i *need* 20Hz-20kHz at 110db or better dynamic range, ideally bit perfect or at least Flac.
aptX-HD and LDAC both support 20-20kHz at 120db DR over bluetooth - now whether all devices/iems/headphones/etc support that is another story.
I can't really think of a reason you'd want lossless streaming over bluetooth.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9691
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9691
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5546665 Posted on: 05/14/2018 06:04 PM
Not really, you have to try pretty hard to make Bluetooth a security threat to you. You should really only be afraid of being vulnerable if all of the following are true:
* You use 0000 or 1234 for your PIN
* You set your device to be always visible
* You deliberately have all your personal files shared and accessible via Bluetooth
* You use high-power mode, which can extend your range beyond 10 meters
But really, in the unlikely event someone hacks into the datastream of my gamepad, why should I care? They can't get any useful data out of it, so worst case scenario, they add a few unwanted inputs here and there and I lose the game. It'd be so subtle that I'd likely just blame the problem on signal interference.
The only time Bluetooth's security is questionable is when using it for phone calls or keyboards.
Pay extra for what? Bluetooth is dirt cheap, and free to use. As for quality, that depends entirely on both the receiver and transmitter. To my understanding, most devices can go up to 320Kbps, which is plenty good enough (and to my understanding, higher than XM). Some devices can go even higher, if they have the compatible codecs and protocols. If you're transmitting both mic and mono speaker, the quality is always atrocious.
My Android phone's stereo Bluetooth audio is total garbage - sounds close to 64Kbps. But my old "dumbphone" can stream Bluetooth audio with hardly any discernible quality loss in my car's stereo. The point is: not all BT audio devices are equal.
When I was shopping for modern High End BT Headphones, I came to conclusion that BT audio standard is crap.
1st Music playback itself is not great, it is just acceptable.
Then you pick a call, an this 44kHz sampling rate music/media channel is automatically closed and 2 new 8kHz in & out are opened.
Same behavior with all $100+ headsets. Look at Marshall Major ii Bluetooth, any self respecting owner returned them. Then others resigned on their right to have quality product, and use cable. Rest have bad experience.
I had Marshall Major II BT for 16 hours before I returned them to shop. I went through Sony, Samsung, ... none has acceptable quality once you use voice channel back to phone/PC/... $200 no change.
But they all boast with newest BT standard and encoding algorithms... Pointless waste of time to look for quality BT headset.
Not really, you have to try pretty hard to make Bluetooth a security threat to you. You should really only be afraid of being vulnerable if all of the following are true:
* You use 0000 or 1234 for your PIN
* You set your device to be always visible
* You deliberately have all your personal files shared and accessible via Bluetooth
* You use high-power mode, which can extend your range beyond 10 meters
But really, in the unlikely event someone hacks into the datastream of my gamepad, why should I care? They can't get any useful data out of it, so worst case scenario, they add a few unwanted inputs here and there and I lose the game. It'd be so subtle that I'd likely just blame the problem on signal interference.
The only time Bluetooth's security is questionable is when using it for phone calls or keyboards.
Pay extra for what? Bluetooth is dirt cheap, and free to use. As for quality, that depends entirely on both the receiver and transmitter. To my understanding, most devices can go up to 320Kbps, which is plenty good enough (and to my understanding, higher than XM). Some devices can go even higher, if they have the compatible codecs and protocols. If you're transmitting both mic and mono speaker, the quality is always atrocious.
My Android phone's stereo Bluetooth audio is total garbage - sounds close to 64Kbps. But my old "dumbphone" can stream Bluetooth audio with hardly any discernible quality loss in my car's stereo. The point is: not all BT audio devices are equal.
When I was shopping for modern High End BT Headphones, I came to conclusion that BT audio standard is crap.
1st Music playback itself is not great, it is just acceptable.
Then you pick a call, an this 44kHz sampling rate music/media channel is automatically closed and 2 new 8kHz in & out are opened.
Same behavior with all $100+ headsets. Look at Marshall Major ii Bluetooth, any self respecting owner returned them. Then others resigned on their right to have quality product, and use cable. Rest have bad experience.
I had Marshall Major II BT for 16 hours before I returned them to shop. I went through Sony, Samsung, ... none has acceptable quality once you use voice channel back to phone/PC/... $200 no change.
But they all boast with newest BT standard and encoding algorithms... Pointless waste of time to look for quality BT headset.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4343
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5546668 Posted on: 05/14/2018 06:12 PM
When I was shopping for modern High End BT Headphones, I came to conclusion that BT audio standard is crap.
1st Music playback itself is not great, it is just acceptable.
I would agree with this. To me, there is no such thing as a "high end BT headphone", at least relative to high-end corded headphones. In my eyes, BT is plenty good enough for the average person, but I would never recommend it to audiophiles, especially those who wear headphones.
But they all boast with newest BT standard and encoding algorithms... Pointless waste of time to look for quality BT headset.
As I said before, what matters most is if both ends are up-to-spec. BT audio is very similar to analog audio cords: the quality is only as good as the worst component. The aptX-HD protocol, for example, supports up to 576Kbps @ 24-bit, but it's a proprietary technology. If both ends don't support that codec, you're not going to get that experience.
When I was shopping for modern High End BT Headphones, I came to conclusion that BT audio standard is crap.
1st Music playback itself is not great, it is just acceptable.
I would agree with this. To me, there is no such thing as a "high end BT headphone", at least relative to high-end corded headphones. In my eyes, BT is plenty good enough for the average person, but I would never recommend it to audiophiles, especially those who wear headphones.
But they all boast with newest BT standard and encoding algorithms... Pointless waste of time to look for quality BT headset.
As I said before, what matters most is if both ends are up-to-spec. BT audio is very similar to analog audio cords: the quality is only as good as the worst component. The aptX-HD protocol, for example, supports up to 576Kbps @ 24-bit, but it's a proprietary technology. If both ends don't support that codec, you're not going to get that experience.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 12315
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 12315
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5546670 Posted on: 05/14/2018 06:24 PM
I would agree with this. To me, there is no such thing as a "high end BT headphone", at least relative to high-end corded headphones. In my eyes, BT is plenty good enough for the average person, but I would never recommend it to audiophiles, especially those who wear headphones.
As I said before, what matters most is if both ends are up-to-spec. BT audio is very similar to analog audio cords: the quality is only as good as the worst component. The aptX-HD protocol, for example, supports up to 576Kbps @ 24-bit, but it's a proprietary technology. If both ends don't support that codec, you're not going to get that experience.
Your second paragraph is the issue. Even when you think devices are compatible, certain combinations aren't. I have a pair of Westone IEM's and their MMCX bluetooth cable, on my Pixel XL2 the experience is terrible - not only is the range bad but even when it's not cutting out the quality is shit and the AptX option doesn't show in the properties for the device while it does for other AptX devices I own. The same setup sounds/works great on nearly every Samsung phone I've tried.. so clearly there is some kind of issue with those two devices.
I ended up going back to a cable and buying a third party USB-C DAC because the one that ships with the XL2 broke on me twice.
I would agree with this. To me, there is no such thing as a "high end BT headphone", at least relative to high-end corded headphones. In my eyes, BT is plenty good enough for the average person, but I would never recommend it to audiophiles, especially those who wear headphones.
As I said before, what matters most is if both ends are up-to-spec. BT audio is very similar to analog audio cords: the quality is only as good as the worst component. The aptX-HD protocol, for example, supports up to 576Kbps @ 24-bit, but it's a proprietary technology. If both ends don't support that codec, you're not going to get that experience.
Your second paragraph is the issue. Even when you think devices are compatible, certain combinations aren't. I have a pair of Westone IEM's and their MMCX bluetooth cable, on my Pixel XL2 the experience is terrible - not only is the range bad but even when it's not cutting out the quality is shit and the AptX option doesn't show in the properties for the device while it does for other AptX devices I own. The same setup sounds/works great on nearly every Samsung phone I've tried.. so clearly there is some kind of issue with those two devices.
I ended up going back to a cable and buying a third party USB-C DAC because the one that ships with the XL2 broke on me twice.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 7581
Joined: 2008-07-31
The stream controllers have been out for...how long? and they are now just activating the bluetooth in it?.......alright...?