It’s loss-less, not loss-none
Dang it, was going to make this same joke lol
We really need someone other than Qualcomm & Apple to come up with lossless Bluetooth audio codecs.
TBF the whole Bluetooth audio situation is a complete mess
Opus! It’s a merge of a codec designed for speech (from Skype!) with one designed for high quality audio by Xiph (same people who made OGG/Vorbis).
Although it needs some more work on latency, it prefers to work on bigger frames but default than Bluetooth packets likes, but I’ve seen there’s work on standardizing a version that fits Bluetooth. Google even has it implemented now on Pixel devices.
Fully free codec!
is opus the one that allows high quality mic and headphone at the same time over Bluetooth?
That’s more than a codec question, that’s a Bluetooth audio profile question. Bluetooth LE Audio should support higher quality (including with Opus)
Wait, did Apple implement its own codec? I thought even the Airpods Max used AAC, which is lossy.
As for Qualcomm, only aptX Lossless is lossless and I’m not aware of many products supporting it (most supports aptX HD at most)
Sony created LDAC
Just use uncompressed 16bit/48khz! We’re not bats that would need 96khz audio!
Well bluetooth doesn’t carry enough bitrate to accomplish this. Besides. Apple won’t and doesn’t need to because their AAC encoder is superior. There is no other bluetooth codec that comes even close. Every codec that claims to be the best one yet is more marketing than anything.
Vendors reframed the narrative for SBC to be dog shit so they can push their own as cutting edge new tech. In reality SBC isn’t that bad. The vendor codecs aren’t that good. And Apple has some kind of secret sauce in their AAC encoder that results in really good quality reproduction of audio.
As far as I’ve seen most of the gimmicky codecs are spins of existing old technology. AAC itself is old too but at least one vendor Apple has focused on making their implementation good. We don’t need another standard+1. We just need a common standard done well. If only Apple would open theirs.
Except Opus. Beats it at most bitrates
BT 5 has max bandwidth of 2Mbps, which would in theory be enough for “CD quality”, i.e 44.1khz/16 bit raw uncompressed audio, as that’s around 1.4Mbps. In real life conditions it isn’t. AFAIK aptX lossless gets close by doing some compression.
But if you go full audiophile levels and start demanding lossless 192khz 24 bit audio, that’s 10Mbps and not even remotely possible over BT no matter what you’d try.
Ah, misleading use of terminology that indicates one thing, but will win in court even if it actually means, or can later be said to mean, another.
I hope those involved in helping companies win these lawsuits choke on bones from food sold as boneless. Because that won a court case after “boneless” was redefined as a cooking method.
I don’t want them to choke to death. Just a little lesson, you know?
I vote they choke indefinitely. But not to death; I want them to die of old age, spending decade upon decade choking endlessly.
I remember when unlimited minutes plans for cell phones meant 300 minutes.
Or when Comcast had unlimited downloads which was capped at 2 TB.
These shitty companies know exactly what they are doing.
I had an “unlimited” plan with a cell company - I took them at their word and downloaded gobs of stuff. Got shut down in a week.
Of course it’s Ohio!
I work in pro AV and so many companies do this. Wow, you say LOSSLESS video on a valens chip? Oh, you’ve never actually done a side-by-side conparison, have you…
Extron differentiates between lossless and “visually lossless” which I appreciate.
As unfortunate as the naming misdirection is, I have to say: LDAC sounds significantly better (to me) than other Bluetooth codecs I have tried. It also works on Linux and android with no issues whatsoever. Open source is good.
I use it with a pair of Sony XM5’s, which can also be used in wired mode, so you kind of get the best of both worlds.
at high signal strength LDAC should default to 990kbps… which is kind of ridiculous since it’s so high it’s higher than some lossless codecs, like uncompressed 16-bit 48kHz. (which is higher than standard CD quality)
Uncompressed 16 bit 48KHz stereo is 1536 kbps, which is just slightly higher than what bluetooth 5 is capable of.
Oh I forgot about stereo, ha.
The bitrate is manually enforceable on Linux, too
*specifically using PipeWire
Pipewire or the pulseaduo Bluetooth codec add-on. The pipewire implementation seems to be mimicking the old pulseaudio plugin.
That’s assuming raw PCM data, no compression (lossy or lossless) whatsoever.
LDAC can do lossless redbook audio (16 bit 44.1 KHz) at 990kbps. All other modes are lossy.
It’s probably doing something much like FLAC- lossy encoder + residual corrections to ensure you get the original waveform back out, but with less bandwidth than raw PCM.
Are you using the Hifi Power Cable to? Very important to have
I highly doubt that. Do a proper ABx test (such as the one on digitalfeed.xyz) I have yet to meet someone who can pass the tests with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
You highly doubt my personal experience?
Do you mean abx.digitalfeed.net?
Does this meme format / cat have a name? I was trying to find the raw version the other day and could not.
“Cat looks inside”
Thanks!
Many lossless codecs are lossy codecs + residual encoders. For example FLAC has predictor(lossy codec) + residual.
To my knowledge it’s lossless in CD quality only, in high-res modes it becomes lossy
FLAC is a lossless compression format. It will reduce file size but keeps the audio quality. So-called “high-res” format on streaming platform like spotify (mandatory fuck spotify here) are usually mp3 320kbps so heavily compressed and lossy, indeed.
My favorite is most people are listening to already lossy compressed music that gets decoded and then recompressed in another lossy manner… I miss my cable sometimes.
“On 17 September 2019, the Japan Audio Society (JAS) certified LDAC with their Hi-Res Audio Wireless certification.”
Something something oxymoron. Bluetooth is trash, its why I still use wired whenever I can.
Ignorant of the subject matter, but I ripped a bunch of CDs to FLAC some time ago. Would that not work for this purpose?
The Sound Guys do a good job of breaking down LDAC, however the main point of criticism I have about the article is that they say that LDAC isn’t great because most smartphones don’t auto-choose the highest 990 bitrate. That doesn’t seem like an LDAC problem, that seems like a phone problem. My phone is admittedly a Sony, but it always chooses the highest bitrate first. There’s even a setting to force it to use 990.
The other criticism I have is that the sound guys kind of overlook the fact that, when your phone is in your pocket, it’s close enough to the headphones that you’ll almost always get the 990 bitrate. And the sound quality at 990 is fantastic. I cannot tell a difference between it and a wired connection for CD-quality FLACs. Even the 660 stepdown bitrate of the LDAC codec is really good.
Compression is lossy.
So when you zip some files and then unzip them, some of the bytes are missing? Really?!
It’s only the zeros, so you’re not really missing anything.
If nothing is lost, what did you compress away? Decompression is magic, I ain’t gotta explain shit
you compressed away redundant data, 1111111000000000011111111 -> (1x7)(0x10)(1x8)
Keep your magic ways to yourself, wizard
If you want the magic explained, here’s a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lempel%E2%80%93Ziv%E2%80%93Welch
Newer fractional arithmetic encoding can get crazy
Some compression is lossy
