On Thursday 13 December 2018 18:42:11 Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > What is the purpose of adding aptX codec (non HD variant)? It is not > > better then default and mandatory SBC codec. > > > > When using AptX codec one can be certain it's always 352 kbps bitrate. > with SBC you never know what you end up using.. This is just because of current implementation of SBC in pulseaudio. Why not rather invest time to properly support SBC at high quality or allow user to set quality / show user current quality? SBC is mandatory and supported by all devices, aptX only by some (plus codec is proprietary). Adding aptX codec just because SBC implementation in pulseaudio is not so "nice" is not a good argument. > So it's good to have normal (non-HD) AptX supported aswell. > > > -- > > Pali Rohár > > pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx > > > -- Pasi > > _______________________________________________ > pulseaudio-discuss mailing list > pulseaudio-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss -- Pali Rohár pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
