BT Speaker Volume Knob Actually Moving Windows 10 Master Volume - SOLVED

[DW1961]

With this specific set of speakers (amplified with volume control knob), adjusting the physical volume knob on the speakers also moves the Windows Master Volume Control slider. I've NEVER seen that before. In other words, I cannot lower the speaker volume using it's physical knob without also lowering the Windows Master Volume Control slider.

 That's dangerous because Windows could somehow max the volume, which would also max the speaker volume. The way it's always been is that you max all of the Windows volume sliders, then turn up the physical knob on your amplified speakers to a level just louder than you will ever use, then go back into Windows and lower the volume to your desired level. That way if Windows ever messes up and maxes it's volume, your Bluetooth amplified speakers / Bluetooth amp will only put out the power you specified on the physical control knob.

How is this hardware connected only through Bluetooth affecting Windows Master Volume control?

---

SOLVED

1. Open Windows Registry (regedit.exe).

2. Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Bluetooth\Audio\AVRCP\CT

3. Make sure you are in the "CT" directory.

4. If it doesn't, exist create REG_DWORD32 called:

DisableAbsoluteVolume

5.  and set it's value to 1.

Was driving me crazy.

[DW1961]

I was going to delete this, but thought I would leave it for others. I have many Bluetooth amplified speakers and BT Amps and I have never seen this behavior using any of them, until this new set. For some reason, these speakers are affected by a control in the Windows 10 registry. You can change it and stop the device from adjusting Windows Master Volume.


1. Open Windows Registry (regedit.exe).

2. Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Bluetooth\Audio\AVRCP\CT

3. Make sure you are in the "CT" directory.

4. If it doesn't, exist create REG_DWORD32 called:

DisableAbsoluteVolume

5.  and set it's value to 1.

Was driving me crazy.

[magic]

It's a fancy feature, Android documentation explains the concept:
https://source.android.com/devices/bluetooth/services

[DW1961]

It's a fancy feature, Android documentation explains the concept:
https://source.android.com/devices/bluetooth/services

Whatever it is, as usual, the function can damage not only your ears but your equipment. It's just the sort of thing that takes away control from the user based on "It makes your life better" generalizations. Consider that when this is functioning, you cannot lower the speaker physical volume without lowering Windows Master Volume. This means Windows takes control of the speaker's physical volume levels (because it works in the opposite to). So now what happens when somehow, and it happens a lot, Windows Master Volume Control maxes out your speaker or ear phones automatically the next time you use the speakers? I mean, can you imagine hardware doing that on it's own? (You'd set your volume level on your amp, and shut the amp off to go to bed. The next morning you switch on the amp, and the volume is 100%.)

Anyway, no OS should take complete control of your hardware like that. It's bullshit. It's scary, really. I mean we're not taking about software controlling other software, we are talking bout software taking complete control of a function of your hardware, that is, overriding your hardware's physical adjustments -- and not even telling you. And that, all through a simple Bluetooth connection? It's alarming to me.

[magic]

We need another European standard ensuring that active speakers cannot exceed 80dB SPL, problem solved
 

Seriously though, if there are two independent volume controls, what if somebody sets one to zero and then concludes that the other is defective?
Hint: consumer products these days are optimized for bottom of the barrel idiots, no exceptions.

[Ed.Kloonk]

We need another European standard ensuring that active speakers cannot exceed 80dB SPL, problem solved
 

I'm surprised that it is 2021 and you can still flip w10 reg settings without causing a warning/confirm dialog popup.

[newbrain]

I find the feature perfectly natural.
The same way I'd be surprised (not in a good sense) if the volume on my remote was not in synch with the volume on the TV.
That said:

Whatever it is, as usual, the function can damage not only your ears but your equipment.[...]The next morning you switch on the amp, and the volume is 100%.)

I call  : Windows 10 remembers the volume level per device. So if you set your speakers to, say, 50% then disconnect them and set the PC volume to 100%, the next time you reconnect them they'll be 50% - and yes, that survives across reboots.

Anyway, no OS should take complete control of your hardware like that.

Go figure, that's what I always thought OSes should be doing...I would hate to manually spin up my disks.

I don't have a BT equipped Linux machine a.t.m.: how do they behave? (I can imagine there might be some variations due to DE, audio framework in use etc...)

[DW1961]

We need another European standard ensuring that active speakers cannot exceed 80dB SPL, problem solved
 

Seriously though, if there are two independent volume controls, what if somebody sets one to zero and then concludes that the other is defective?
Hint: consumer products these days are optimized for bottom of the barrel idiots, no exceptions.

I would think the lowest consumer denominator would think that if they turn their speaker/amp knob to zero, it means zero.

[DW1961]

I find the feature perfectly natural.
The same way I'd be surprised (not in a good sense) if the volume on my remote was not in synch with the volume on the TV.
That said:

Whatever it is, as usual, the function can damage not only your ears but your equipment.[...]The next morning you switch on the amp, and the volume is 100%.)

I call  : Windows 10 remembers the volume level per device. So if you set your speakers to, say, 50% then disconnect them and set the PC volume to 100%, the next time you reconnect them they'll be 50% - and yes, that survives across reboots.

Anyway, no OS should take complete control of your hardware like that.

Go figure, that's what I always thought OSes should be doing...I would hate to manually spin up my disks.

I don't have a BT equipped Linux machine a.t.m.: how do they behave? (I can imagine there might be some variations due to DE, audio framework in use etc...)

Ok, so let me clarify thing. First, your devices that are physically plugged into Windows, yes, that's perfectly find for them to be able to adjust them, such as fans and DVD players. Was that a joke?

However, I've never seen, for example, a fan controller plugged into a Windows machine that gets overridden by software. That would defeat the purpose of the controller.

Why should a physical speaker connected wirelessly have it's physical volume knob overridden by Windows? That makes it IMPOSSIBLE to make sure your speaker volume is zero using the physical knob (because Windows or Windows applications can change it without the knob spinning).

Windows 10 remembers the volume levels?  Ok, you plug in your $2500.00 reference speakers and trust Windows to get the volume correct each time you start your OS. You do realize that there is a setting in Windows that is default on that allows "applications to take full control of this device" independent of what Windows thinks? In addition, what if you reinstall Windows, or delete the specific speakers from your list of speakers? Windows now does not have a record of the device volume. Another problem come from different sources in the same app having different volume levels.. For instance, have you ever started a video in your web browser and had it blow you out of your chair, just seconds after you listened to a webpage where the volume was fine?

Having full control over your physical volume prevents those things from destroying your equipment. They best way to prevent Windows from screwing up and costing you damage is to max all of Windows volume controls, then start increasing your physical speaker's volume knob to a point where it just a little too loud, so you have head room to turn up the volume when you want. That way, no matter how loud Windows volume controls are, you never exceed the volume you physically set on the speaker.

[Bassman59]

With this specific set of speakers (amplified with volume control knob), adjusting the physical volume knob on the speakers also moves the Windows Master Volume Control slider. I've NEVER seen that before. In other words, I cannot lower the speaker volume using it's physical knob without also lowering the Windows Master Volume Control slider.

 That's dangerous because Windows could somehow max the volume, which would also max the speaker volume. The way it's always been is that you max all of the Windows volume sliders, then turn up the physical knob on your amplified speakers to a level just louder than you will ever use, then go back into Windows and lower the volume to your desired level. That way if Windows ever messes up and maxes it's volume, your Bluetooth amplified speakers / Bluetooth amp will only put out the power you specified on the physical control knob.

How is this hardware connected only through Bluetooth affecting Windows Master Volume control?

Without knowing exactly which speakers you're talking about ...

Generally, the volume knob doesn't directly control the volume. It's read by a microcontroller which will then set the volume in response to knob moves.

The knob appears to the host computer as a Human Interface Device. That is, when you turn it, the computer recognizes the motion and updates whatever control it's connected to. This makes sense: you want the physical knob and the virtual knob to be in sync.

In this case, it appears as if the knob controls the Windows master volume. There may be a configuration you can change somewhere in Windows so that the behavior is what you expect.

I find the Windows 10 audio control stuff to be baffling and poorly considered. It's all so much better on the Mac.

[DW1961]

With this specific set of speakers (amplified with volume control knob), adjusting the physical volume knob on the speakers also moves the Windows Master Volume Control slider. I've NEVER seen that before. In other words, I cannot lower the speaker volume using it's physical knob without also lowering the Windows Master Volume Control slider.

 That's dangerous because Windows could somehow max the volume, which would also max the speaker volume. The way it's always been is that you max all of the Windows volume sliders, then turn up the physical knob on your amplified speakers to a level just louder than you will ever use, then go back into Windows and lower the volume to your desired level. That way if Windows ever messes up and maxes it's volume, your Bluetooth amplified speakers / Bluetooth amp will only put out the power you specified on the physical control knob.

How is this hardware connected only through Bluetooth affecting Windows Master Volume control?

Without knowing exactly which speakers you're talking about ...

Generally, the volume knob doesn't directly control the volume. It's read by a microcontroller which will then set the volume in response to knob moves.

The knob appears to the host computer as a Human Interface Device. That is, when you turn it, the computer recognizes the motion and updates whatever control it's connected to. This makes sense: you want the physical knob and the virtual knob to be in sync.

In this case, it appears as if the knob controls the Windows master volume. There may be a configuration you can change somewhere in Windows so that the behavior is what you expect.

I find the Windows 10 audio control stuff to be baffling and poorly considered. It's all so much better on the Mac.

Yeah it is baffling, for sure. that's why I don't want Windows linking to my physical volume controls, ever. The rule for Windows users and audio is to set all of the numerous volume controls in Windows to MAX. Then set your audio device to zero and gradually turn up the  physical volume control to a point you would never want it louder, but at  point it would never damage any of your equipment if it got maxed. Then, go back into Windows and adjust the volume where you want it, at a normal listening level. If Windows ever fucks up, and it does, at least you have a physical cap on volume levels.

The problem is called "Absolute Volume." The reason, probably, I've never seen it is because this is the first device that actually had an IC controller for volume and that Windows sees as an HID.

I edited the original above to reflect the true problem and it's solution.

1. Open Windows Registry (regedit.exe).

2. Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Bluetooth\Audio\AVRCP\CT

3. Make sure you are in the "CT" directory.

4. If it doesn't, exist create REG_DWORD32 called:

DisableAbsoluteVolume

5.  Set it's value to 1.

[David Hess]

Windows also ties the balance controls for Bluetooth together but there is a registry key to separate them.

I investigated using Bluetooth for my computer speakers but tests revealed unacceptable latency.

[DW1961]

Windows also ties the balance controls for Bluetooth together but there is a registry key to separate them.

I investigated using Bluetooth for my computer speakers but tests revealed unacceptable latency.

David,

You need an BT transmitter and receiver (a "sink") that incorporates aptX LL (LL=Low Latency) or aptX Adaptive (does the same thing). That will lower the latency so you don't have de-sync in videos. It will also make your audio music sound better because the aptX codec does a better job than the default SBC codec (although SBC gets a bad rap and does quit well really, depending on its implementation).

The god news is that your cell phone probably already uses AptX LL. You just need to enable it. if you are n Windows, your BT adapter might support it. However, it may not be  enabled because it requires a driver. That's on your computer manufacturer to do, and if you built your own, good luck! I found an aptX driver from the Dell website from 2015. I installed it and BAM, my adapter now had aptX and aptX LL in the Windows Sound tab. However, enabling LL caused stuttering. AptX worked fine. That's probably due to the age of the driver.

Easiest is to get a nice transmitter and sink, about 100.00 for both, maybe 120.00 total for both, with a nice Wharfedale (etc) DAC on board.

[james_s]

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Why would you want to have to adjust the volume separately in two different places if you can have a physical knob on the speaker that adjusts the master volume? Why would you ever turn it up all the way? A reasonable listening volume on the speaker ought to translate to a reasonable listening volume on headphones in most cases.

[DW1961]

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Why would you want to have to adjust the volume separately in two different places if you can have a physical knob on the speaker that adjusts the master volume? Why would you ever turn it up all the way? A reasonable listening volume on the speaker ought to translate to a reasonable listening volume on headphones in most cases.

As explained above, that leaves Windows in control of your physical device, e.g., if Windows gets the volume wrong, and maxes everything out, it could not only destroy your equipment but damage your ears too. If you have physical control over your device (e.g., amp) volume, and you turn all volume up in Windows, then set the physical knob to a range you want without exploding your speakers and ears, it doesn't matter if Windows gets it wrong. Your physical volume will always limit total volume even if all Windows volume controls are 100%.

[james_s]

I don't think I've ever seen a bluetooth speaker that had a physical volume control that was an actual analog volume control, it's always a software based control.

I've had a large power amplifier with no volume control connected to my PC for many years, at least back into the Win98 era. Windows has always been in control of the volume, I've never had any issue with it at all. About 12 years ago I built a USB volume/mute control that sits on the desk to make it more convenient. It works perfectly fine, I suppose it's technically possible but it shouldn't happen and I've never had it happen. Unless you're driving a massive power amplifier and/or have valuable and easily damaged speakers this is a total non-issue. The remote device volume control acting on the master volume on the PC/mobile device is exactly what I want, and exactly how most people now expect it to work.

[DW1961]

I don't think I've ever seen a bluetooth speaker that had a physical volume control that was an actual analog volume control, it's always a software based control.

I've had a large power amplifier with no volume control connected to my PC for many years, at least back into the Win98 era. Windows has always been in control of the volume, I've never had any issue with it at all. About 12 years ago I built a USB volume/mute control that sits on the desk to make it more convenient. It works perfectly fine, I suppose it's technically possible but it shouldn't happen and I've never had it happen. Unless you're driving a massive power amplifier and/or have valuable and easily damaged speakers this is a total non-issue. The remote device volume control acting on the master volume on the PC/mobile device is exactly what I want, and exactly how most people now expect it to work.

It's not just Windows you have to worry about. It's the software you use for audio, too. If the Master Volume control works to limit volume, then you do have some protection from software. I've seen software max volume after an update or patch. As for streaming, same thing there. You're not in control of how loud the streaming station is broadcasting, be that fro a .pls, Amazon, Youtube, etc. And, again, to your point, Windows Master Volume can be used to limit absolute volume.

As far as BT devices having a volume control knob not seen in Windows as a "device," they are all over the place. Maybe they are all changing over to a non-independent volume control? Probably. My BT enabled amp has a physical volume knob, and bass and treble too, and the volume  it is not identified by Windows as a "device."  Old amps with volume knobs that have a line in can use modern BT receivers. Those volume controls are not affected by software.

To your point, having one master volume control for everything is a great idea. I just don't trust Windows software to get it right in mission critical instances. If it were software integrated into hardware, such as a BIOS, then I'd be more likely to trust it.

I'm glad that having Windows software control the main volume on your audio equipment serves your needs. However, even if "most people" want it that way, it doesn't mean it is better. For instance, most people just want to listen to music trough their phones on a single, mono BT speaker. That doesn't mean it's superior to other options. To be clear, I'm all for a functioning master volume, just not one that takes away my physical audio control - yet.

For me, I want a way to physically cap power output to my physical devices. I'll use and do use Windows Master Volume all of the time. But, currently, I still want absolute control over my hardware. Maybe I'm just "old fashioned?"

[David Hess]

Windows also ties the balance controls for Bluetooth together but there is a registry key to separate them.

I investigated using Bluetooth for my computer speakers but tests revealed unacceptable latency.

The god news is that your cell phone probably already uses AptX LL.

The bad news is that I am not using a cell phone.

You just need to enable it. if you are n Windows, your BT adapter might support it. However, it may not be  enabled because it requires a driver. That's on your computer manufacturer to do, and if you built your own, good luck! I found an aptX driver from the Dell website from 2015. I installed it and BAM, my adapter now had aptX and aptX LL in the Windows Sound tab. However, enabling LL caused stuttering. AptX worked fine. That's probably due to the age of the driver.

I always build my own computers.

You need an BT transmitter and receiver (a "sink") that incorporates aptX LL (LL=Low Latency) or aptX Adaptive (does the same thing). That will lower the latency so you don't have de-sync in videos. It will also make your audio music sound better because the aptX codec does a better job than the default SBC codec (although SBC gets a bad rap and does quit well really, depending on its implementation).

Easiest is to get a nice transmitter and sink, about 100.00 for both, maybe 120.00 total for both, with a nice Wharfedale (etc) DAC on board.

I only investigated it as a replacement for the wired connection between my desktop and amplifier, which would also remove any possibility of a ground loop.  My amplifier has Bluetooth 5 built in, but that is the extent of those specifications.  After testing a current USB to Bluetooth dongle and perusing why it did not work correctly and what would be required to correct the situation, I concluded that Bluetooth is a fucking waste of time.  How in the hell did they manage to make a standard which cannot transparently replace a wired connection?

I don't think I've ever seen a bluetooth speaker that had a physical volume control that was an actual analog volume control, it's always a software based control.

I've had a large power amplifier with no volume control connected to my PC for many years, at least back into the Win98 era. Windows has always been in control of the volume, I've never had any issue with it at all. About 12 years ago I built a USB volume/mute control that sits on the desk to make it more convenient. It works perfectly fine, I suppose it's technically possible but it shouldn't happen and I've never had it happen. Unless you're driving a massive power amplifier and/or have valuable and easily damaged speakers this is a total non-issue. The remote device volume control acting on the master volume on the PC/mobile device is exactly what I want, and exactly how most people now expect it to work.

My amplifier has line level inputs as well as Bluetooth, and I specifically bought it because it has volume, tone controls, and subwoofer controls.  In retrospect I am rather happy that I did not go the powered speaker route although I almost did.

[DW1961]

Windows also ties the balance controls for Bluetooth together but there is a registry key to separate them.

I investigated using Bluetooth for my computer speakers but tests revealed unacceptable latency.

The god news is that your cell phone probably already uses AptX LL.

The bad news is that I am not using a cell phone.

You just need to enable it. if you are n Windows, your BT adapter might support it. However, it may not be  enabled because it requires a driver. That's on your computer manufacturer to do, and if you built your own, good luck! I found an aptX driver from the Dell website from 2015. I installed it and BAM, my adapter now had aptX and aptX LL in the Windows Sound tab. However, enabling LL caused stuttering. AptX worked fine. That's probably due to the age of the driver.

I always build my own computers.

You need an BT transmitter and receiver (a "sink") that incorporates aptX LL (LL=Low Latency) or aptX Adaptive (does the same thing). That will lower the latency so you don't have de-sync in videos. It will also make your audio music sound better because the aptX codec does a better job than the default SBC codec (although SBC gets a bad rap and does quit well really, depending on its implementation).

Easiest is to get a nice transmitter and sink, about 100.00 for both, maybe 120.00 total for both, with a nice Wharfedale (etc) DAC on board.

I only investigated it as a replacement for the wired connection between my desktop and amplifier, which would also remove any possibility of a ground loop.  My amplifier has Bluetooth 5 built in, but that is the extent of those specifications.  After testing a current USB to Bluetooth dongle and perusing why it did not work correctly and what would be required to correct the situation, I concluded that Bluetooth is a fucking waste of time.  How in the hell did they manage to make a standard which cannot transparently replace a wired connection?

I don't think I've ever seen a bluetooth speaker that had a physical volume control that was an actual analog volume control, it's always a software based control.

I've had a large power amplifier with no volume control connected to my PC for many years, at least back into the Win98 era. Windows has always been in control of the volume, I've never had any issue with it at all. About 12 years ago I built a USB volume/mute control that sits on the desk to make it more convenient. It works perfectly fine, I suppose it's technically possible but it shouldn't happen and I've never had it happen. Unless you're driving a massive power amplifier and/or have valuable and easily damaged speakers this is a total non-issue. The remote device volume control acting on the master volume on the PC/mobile device is exactly what I want, and exactly how most people now expect it to work.

My amplifier has line level inputs as well as Bluetooth, and I specifically bought it because it has volume, tone controls, and subwoofer controls.  In retrospect I am rather happy that I did not go the powered speaker route although I almost did.

There isn't anything from stopping amp manufacturers from implementing "True Volume" in their amp volume controls. BT does work. I wish we still had access to WiFi Dongle to sink audio. Creative use to make one. Everything is BT  now. I would give the transmitter/receiver a try. I just got one from the free product program I am in and it worked great. It's a US company to, and I've been buying their products since forever. Startech is the brand. This is the receiver:
https://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-Bluetooth-5-0-Audio-Receiver/dp/B091BF3NNX/ref=sr_1_3?crid=SZJ93G2GKJV1&dchild=1&keywords=startech%2Bbluetooth%2Breceiver&qid=1624668736&sprefix=startech%2Bbluetoth%2B%2Caps%2C403&sr=8-3&th=1

The Startech is top notch, but basic. It uses the outstanding Wolfson WM8524 Digital to Analog Converter (DAC). it just doesn't have any read outs telling you what codec is in use.

I'd get the MI version, since it has on LCD telling you what codec you are sing in real time:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07D1JJBJR/ref=sspa_dk_detail_0?psc=1&pd_rd_i=B07D1JJBJR&pd_rd_w=zgSKo&pf_rd_p=91afecf5-8b2e-41e2-9f11-dc6992c6eaa1&pd_rd_wg=FSgnC&pf_rd_r=0QJ0YYZANQ9MCZ7E02M2&pd_rd_r=6c6ff840-6e81-4ad6-ab92-44f8e06547b7&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUFHTURWSjFIOUhWNDgmZW5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTAxNjI1NzUyVlRMSkdMWURPWVdFJmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTA1NDM1NDUxMEZFM1RQTDRCUTlCJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfZGV0YWlsJmFjdGlvbj1jbGlja1JlZGlyZWN0JmRvTm90TG9nQ2xpY2s9dHJ1ZQ==

I don't know what DAC it uses, and if your amp uses it's own DAC through line in, then you don't need to worry about it.

I have a couple pairs of powered speakers. They sound really good, actually, since they can exactly match amp to speaker in all ways. If you don't want to mess with a receiver/amp or amp, it's A way to go. I never liked them because you have one side with no resistance and then the other side with the wire resistance, which means you get less power to one side -  for longer runs.

However, for some reason, I don't want powered speakers. I want the speaker to be a speaker and an amp to be an amp. The only exception is a powered sub because it's self contained. That's ok with me. It allows me to run  a really small amp for the satellites. Sub takes care of itself.

If you have a BT adapter in your rig, it should work with any BT receiver. You can even go PCI if you want.

[David Hess]

BT does work. I wish we still had access to WiFi Dongle to sink audio. Creative use to make one. Everything is BT  now. I would give the transmitter/receiver a try. I just got one from the free product program I am in and it worked great. It's a US company to, and I've been buying their products since forever. Startech is the brand. This is the receiver:

The problem is that I already have the Bluetooth 5 receiver and DAC built into the amplifier, and it is not clear that any transmitter that I purchase will support low latency.  If I had to buy a paired Bluetooth DAC and transmitter, then I might as well remove any uncertainty and only buy an optical S/PDIF DAC which is my plan at this point if I do anything after Bluetooth completely failed.

As far as I am concerned, whoever sets the standards for Bluetooth has completely failed.  There is no way to know which devices support which modes, and that prevents it from being a replacement for wired connections except in the least demanding applications.

I have a couple pairs of powered speakers. They sound really good, actually, since they can exactly match amp to speaker in all ways. If you don't want to mess with a receiver/amp or amp, it's A way to go. I never liked them because you have one side with no resistance and then the other side with the wire resistance, which means you get less power to one side -  for longer runs.

However, for some reason, I don't want powered speakers. I want the speaker to be a speaker and an amp to be an amp. The only exception is a powered sub because it's self contained. That's ok with me. It allows me to run  a really small amp for the satellites. Sub takes care of itself.

I almost went with powered speakers, but the deciding factor was that I could buy passive speakers and a 2.1 amplifier and reuse my existing subwoofer.  As it ended up, testing showed that my old subwoofer was trash and I built and tuned my own replacement which has been fantastic.  In retrospect, I should have built and tuned my own speakers as well but at this point doing so would only be a minor improvement.

[DW1961]

BT does work. I wish we still had access to WiFi Dongle to sink audio. Creative use to make one. Everything is BT  now. I would give the transmitter/receiver a try. I just got one from the free product program I am in and it worked great. It's a US company to, and I've been buying their products since forever. Startech is the brand. This is the receiver:

The problem is that I already have the Bluetooth 5 receiver and DAC built into the amplifier, and it is not clear that any transmitter that I purchase will support low latency. 

If you plug the receiver into your line in, it will bypass your DAC and BT built into the amp. You can't have two BT devices running at the same time in Windows.

So just get a receiver with aptX LL and a transmitter with AptX LL, and you are done. that's pretty much what I will do from here out anyway. There is no reason to by an amp with BT when you can just use an external device for all of your needs, plugged into the amps line in (3.5, RCA, SPDIF port) when you replace the amp, change it up, or whatever. They're pretty cheap and the Startech I have uses that really nice DAC, too. The others, who knows.

I use to have a WiFi dongle and receiver that plugged into the amps AUX port. That solved all of the compression problems, but you still need a decent dongle and receiver. Just no one is making them anymore because everything is "mobile" crap. There are just so many ways to go about WiFi audio for HiFi, like making the dongle the sound card itself with a DAC, or making it so it plugs into the computer back panel built in audio out port, which has it's own DAC. I haven't looked, but you cold probably find a PCI sound card that has WiFi and BT enabled on it.

I can't do that because I only build ITX rigs now and they have exactly ONE PCI slot for the video card. So I'm stuck with the M2 adapter card or USB.

[tooki]

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Why would you want to have to adjust the volume separately in two different places if you can have a physical knob on the speaker that adjusts the master volume? Why would you ever turn it up all the way? A reasonable listening volume on the speaker ought to translate to a reasonable listening volume on headphones in most cases.

As explained above, that leaves Windows in control of your physical device, e.g., if Windows gets the volume wrong, and maxes everything out, it could not only destroy your equipment but damage your ears too. If you have physical control over your device (e.g., amp) volume, and you turn all volume up in Windows, then set the physical knob to a range you want without exploding your speakers and ears, it doesn't matter if Windows gets it wrong. Your physical volume will always limit total volume even if all Windows volume controls are 100%.

And the same dangers apply if windows weren’t in control: consider if you had a powerful speaker, your external volume control is at 100% and you use Windows’ master volume for control, keeping the signal quite low, say 10%. If something raises it to 100%, same problem. (Plus, you’d have more noise since you’re cutting the signal at the source and then amplifying it a ton at the amp.)

OTOH, if you keep Windows at 100% and just use the amp volume control, then you lose the ability to tweak volume at the computer, which is also handy, especially if you happen to encounter some unusually weak content that needs extra amplification.

Regardless, I think you’re making much ado about nothing, with contrived justifications to support your opinion.

[magic]

And therefore you use hardware volume control to limit how loud the software can go.
At least that's how the world worked before UI designers

[DW1961]

And therefore you use hardware volume control to limit how loud the software can go.
At least that's how the world worked before UI designers

What he said. This is exactly the point.

[DW1961]

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Why would you want to have to adjust the volume separately in two different places if you can have a physical knob on the speaker that adjusts the master volume? Why would you ever turn it up all the way? A reasonable listening volume on the speaker ought to translate to a reasonable listening volume on headphones in most cases.

As explained above, that leaves Windows in control of your physical device, e.g., if Windows gets the volume wrong, and maxes everything out, it could not only destroy your equipment but damage your ears too. If you have physical control over your device (e.g., amp) volume, and you turn all volume up in Windows, then set the physical knob to a range you want without exploding your speakers and ears, it doesn't matter if Windows gets it wrong. Your physical volume will always limit total volume even if all Windows volume controls are 100%.

And the same dangers apply if windows weren’t in control: consider if you had a powerful speaker, your external volume control is at 100% and you use Windows’ master volume for control, keeping the signal quite low, say 10%. If something raises it to 100%, same problem. (Plus, you’d have more noise since you’re cutting the signal at the source and then amplifying it a ton at the amp.)

OTOH, if you keep Windows at 100% and just use the amp volume control, then you lose the ability to tweak volume at the computer, which is also handy, especially if you happen to encounter some unusually weak content that needs extra amplification.

Regardless, I think you’re making much ado about nothing, with contrived justifications to support your opinion.

"And the same dangers apply if windows weren’t in control. . . ."

And this is a definitely incorrect not my position. My main premise is:

If Windows or any other software is NOT in control, then the only way to increase volume at the physical source is to manually increase yourself.

You never keep Windows volume at 100%. I never said that nor recommend it. To properly set volume so you don't get a surprise explosion, you set INITIALLY all Windows volume settings to 100%. This mirrors what MIGHT happen if a piece of software other than Windows or Windows itself decides to max it's volume. Then you use your amplifier's physical volume knob to turn up the volume to a point that isn't dangerous, but is louder than you would ever want it.

Now you go back into Windows and adjust the volume to where you need it. You have plenty of volume overhead, while at the same time, max volume is limited by your physical amplifier, not software.

When implemented into hardware, Absolute Volume takes that physical control away from the user.

I really do not know how to explain this topic any more clearer.

(As an aside, it's a little like IT professionals trying to tell Microsoft that they cannot be productive using Windows 8 in a professional environment because of the clunky way Windows 8 handles multitasking. Microsoft was always saying it's "better" and "easier." Finally, MS got the message when companies refused the Windows 8 upgrade. The IT community was astounded that MS would reduce their multitasking ability to nearly the DOS level, and having to constantly switch between apps, one at a time. (Like using Andriod on a cell phone.) My friend was working as a software engineer for NASDAQ when this all happened, and he said, "It's like you can't explain it to MS. They just don't get it." He said if MS didn't change it, they were already looking into using Linux for Network and software engineering. I mean, it was that bad, but no one at MS seemed to understand the problem.)