Dang it, was going to make this same joke lol

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!

Bluetooth as a whole is kind of a mess if we’re being honest.

Isn't LDAC made by sony?

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.

I vote they choke indefinitely. But not to death; I want them to die of old age, spending decade upon decade choking endlessly.

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.

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.

Of course it's Ohio!

Just a little to death.

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)

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.net) I have yet to meet someone who can pass the tests with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

“Cat looks inside”

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cat-looks-inside

"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.

I don't understand what's funny. It's developed with no competition, it's open source, it's definitely better than the current options out there and doesn't cost money. Is it just audio snobs in here? I consider myself somewhat snobby re:audio but even I use wireless headphones. Some grade A snobbery in this thread. LDAC is great. You're not convincing anyone to go back to wired headphones for day to day use

It's nearly lossess if you can connect and maintain a 990kbps connection, but it still doesn't have enough bandwidth to do it truly lossless. I think it would require 1411kpbs to be actually lossless. It is still better than any codec I know of for bluetooth as far as that does, but bluetooth just kinda sucks for that sort of application.

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.

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.

Ldac is a Bluetooth thingy, so my understanding is that flacs will be re-encoded on the fly when you play 'em on bt headphones with ldac.

Bluetooth has fairly low bitrate which also helps save power. The throughput will also vary with signal quality. It needs to somehow adjust to worse conditions, otherwise it will just keep cutting out. Streaming CD quality FLAC could probably be done over Bluetooth 5 2M PHY, but 2Mbps is just the physical layer. There's also some overhead. Perhaps just enough would be left, but the bitrate will also vary with the content. Not everything can be compressed much, while some audio can be compressed quite a bit.

Probably would work, but the reliability is also a question.

Anyway, just guessing. Perhaps the 3Mbps EDR could be used just fine.

Oh, Bluetooth 3.0 + HS could do 24Mbps. Sort of. It used WiFi to do that.

Audio CDs contain 44.1kHz 16-bit PCM. If you got FLACs out you transcoded them, and transcoding from lossy to lossless is generally undesirable

EDIT: I stand corrected, I forgot that PCM is not a codec.

In the end, I found I don't really care that much, since lossy Bluetooth works well enough for earbuds on the go, and good old cables are still available for more serious listening.

Plus, the truth is that most people can't tell the difference between lossy and lossless without doing A/B testing, and some can't tell even with that

So when you zip some files and then unzip them, some of the bytes are missing? Really?!

Some compression is lossy