Hi Pali, On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday 13 September 2018 11:23:58 Tanu Kaskinen wrote: >> On Wed, 2018-09-12 at 19:03 +0300, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar at gmail.com> wrote: >> > > 1) What to do with aptX? It is really useful for users to have it in >> > > Linux & pulseaudio? Because it looks like that the only thing which it >> > > has better is lower latency. But can pulseaudio on Linux system really >> > > achieve it? >> > >> > I don't think, not the level of latency necessary for speech and to >> > avoid lip sync issues, so that would leave aptX at the same category >> > as SBC. >> >> How likely is it that a device that supports aptX only supports lower >> SBC bitrates? In such situation aptX would apparently be an >> improvement, but maybe that doesn't happen in real life. > > Such combination does not make sense for me. I do not see reason why > headset would support only low SBC mode which is either due to slow > bluetooth stack or slow DSP and also aptX at higher bitrate... > > I have not heard about such hardware. We should probably check, perhaps some manufacturers are favoring aptX believing the OSes don't support bitpool past 53, which is exactly the situation with PA. -- Luiz Augusto von Dentz
