Hear it: Life P3 In-Depth Review (ANC / Mic / Range / Battery / Water Tested)

It took me more than 6 hours to make this review.
Please smash the Like and Subscribe.

6 Likes

Thanks for putting in the time and effort to make this review! :+1:

1 Like

Sure, you are welcome!

Thanks for doing this.

Yes, they need to upgrade the microphone experience.

I liked your bluetooth range test, but I’d say that as the human body absorbs 2.4Ghz more than the rig setup you have, I’d have liked if you moved the buds from the rig to your head at the upper limit of range and tell us if the signal is lost, and if it, how nearer you have to be.

There isn’t as much water or fat in the wood as the human head.

I’d still expect the max distance outdoors to be very good, just questioning if as good on rig as in ear.

Thanks for sharing. Nice review.

Quite a good review, and I appreciate the thought that went into the testing rig.

One thing that could help future vids would be a camera gimbal (I think) to stabilize the rig when walking. But don’t know if that would be $$$$ or just $$… :thinking:

Keep up the good work and sharing. I can definitely see improvement over previous :+1:

1 Like

I didn’t know about the 2.4ghz on human body thing. I can run another test with them in my ears and let you know.

1 Like

This rig is very heavy so gimbal won’t work.
Putting them on a bike would be better than handheld. It’s something I can explore next time.

1 Like

2.4Ghz is the resonant frequency of O-H chemical bonds, such as found in water (H2O) and fats. It’s the frequency used for microwave ovens to heat the water in food.

The Watts of bluetooth is not dangerous to humans, it just harmlessly gets absorbed. Air in contrast is mostly Nitrogen and CO2 and 2.4Ghz passes much easier through it.

The antennas on the P3 are down the stalk, and fairly long, it’s not a surprise they performed well, but I’d expect in your head they’d cut out earlier, particularly the side of head away from source, so rotating your head to be looking right-angles from source should cause an earlier cut out.

I’d expect the cut out to be even earlier where the antenna is further within / near the body, like L2P.

Now your test is fine to relatively compare the radio signal strength comparison, i.e. you do the tests the same way on all buds, you’d form correct relative performance conclusions, but the absolutes would be likely unrealistic as the rig will be absorbing less than the head.

We’d not expect anyone to use buds like in your test, leaving phone far away outdoors. We’d expect it in their pockets or on a surface within a property, where walls, floors, and humans, do reflection and absorption. So your test is good to fairly claim which bud has the best signal strength relative to each other.

Make sense?

It’s for LDAC 990Kbs where the signal strength real world matters more as the bluetooth standard is 2Mbit so you only need half the signal absorbed for LDAC to become stuttering / slower. For these P3 AAC SBC I expect it to be perfectly acceptable for all real life scenarios.

Interesting video. A water immersion test is best. :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

I was thinking along the lines of a stabilization vest, that would be like a gimbal I suppose… some can hold upwards 40lbs.

Downside, not cheap… $600 +