[mcnaugha]

Besides that, why do you think that you phone supports LE Audio? Hardware certainly can, but it just is not enabled in software.

I'm not going to argue about the reasoning. My point is that you phone simply doesn't have LE Audio.

I think the important point is that I don’t care about your opinion. I don’t know you from Adam. You’ve come on here like someone with Asperger’s that thinis he knows it all when it’s largely just beliefs and opinions. I’m 45. I have an undergrad in Computing Science, a postgrad in Cyber Security with a 25 year career in high-level IT working with big Enterprises. I don’t have any more time for this. I’m Old and weakened by my latest battle with covid. All I can do is agree to disagree.

 

[mcnaugha]

Not true, especially in this case.
"The Apache License is a permissive free software license written by the Apache Software Foundation (ASF).[4] It allows users to use the software for any purpose, to distribute it, to modify it, and to distribute modified versions of the software under the terms of the license, without concern for royalties." (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_License)

this must just be for fun then:
https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/iis/de/doc/ame/FraunhoferIIS_Product-Brochure_LC3.pdf

 

[O11111]

this must just be for fun then:
https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/iis/de/doc/ame/FraunhoferIIS_Product-Brochure_LC3.pdf

Yes? Are you talking about the following quote from these document? "LC3 software for Bluetooth is available for licensing from
Fraunhofer IIS"
What do you think is the main part? LC3 and licensing? Not really, include "software" as well. They sell their own library (presumably written in C) to someone who doesn't want to develop it by themselves. There's also LC3plus and it's a whole another story. And if you were talking about LC3plus (not LC3), I would agree with your every word about licenses. Remember your screenshot with 0.07$ price for LC3plus? However, this doesn't mean that there's no free library.

You’ve come on here like someone with Asperger’s that thinis he knows it all when it’s largely just beliefs and opinions

Is it argumentum ad hominem I'm seeing here? And you're saying it's me with only beliefs and opinions. Cool, how mature of you.

I’m 45. I have an undergrad in Computing Science, a postgrad in Cyber Security with a 25 year career in high-level IT working with big Enterprises

Wisdom does not always come with age. But more often than not, age comes alone.
All these titles don't make you any more on topic. nRF5340 Audio DK for some time only had SBC for LE Audio (which is non-standard as it seems), but now they're using not Fraunhofer library (and it's not even open-source).
I found one interesting sentence from here:
"The LC3 technology as such was developed and is owned by Fraunhofer-
Gesellschaft and the rights thereto are made available to interested parties through the product
certification by Bluetooth Special Interest Group."
And here (no idea how reputable is this website, but you don't like even the Bluetooth SIG website):
"All those features will come without licensing fees, so some savings could (and, perhaps, should) be passed down to consumers in some cases, although Bluetooth components are just one small factor in a product's overall price."
There are exactly zero certified LE Audio devices without LC3 and that's it. Don't know what to say anymore. All my arguments were ignored without refutations. And except examples (which I kind of proved wrong. It's obviously possible to make device without LC3 but with LE Audio. Both 8+ gen 1 and qcc5171 can do it. But this isn't going to happen because it makes absolutely no sense: it is free while other codecs will be not. And they both support it, at least the libraries are present. Haven't tested them though) you seem to have no arguments proving your point.

 

[O11111]

Where is my LC3?

And here it is. Paranoid Android seems to just have it.

 

[Blacklands]

I had also been under the impression (e.g. from the same pages that have also already been linked earlier in here) that LC3 is basically the "new SBC" of LE Audio - meaning the mandatory codec that every device implementing LE Audio has to support.
If that turns out not to be true, I'd be pretty disappointed, too, because SBC is really terrible and I'm hoping that in the future all the devices would presumably come with LE Audio and thus you'd always have at least LC3.

I feel like there's been some confusion with LC3plus here, maybe? I'm pretty sure that's a separate codec (and optional for LE Audio), and that one does require licensing.

As for the Fraunhofer LC3 thing, I was also thinking that this is just their software implementation for LC3. But they aren't licensing out the right to use the codec itself. If you have another implementation (or make your own one), you're good.

EDIT: And can we please not throw stuff like "Asperger's" at other people here? Especially as if it's an insult (which it isn't)? What kind of tone is that?
(And by the way, that doesn't exist anymore. There's only Autism Spectrum Disorder now, in both the ICD-11 and the DSM-5. But I don't think that is relevant for anything in this thread.)

 

[DrTesla]

Any difference between Vaorlo KB9P vs the QCC3056 version? I cannot find any actual difference or info about these devices...
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004586765267.html

 

[dunk]

I did some back and forth testing with the KB9P and YET-T10 adapters connected to my qudelix, as I was bothered by the sound quality I was getting from the former. When I initially tested the T10 I dismissed it as the latency was more noticable than the KB9P while the range was good on both. When revisiting the T10 now I noticed that the sound quality is substantially better and pretty much on par with the qudelix USB wired. The latency is still pretty bad on the T10, I'm guessing around 200ms while the KB9P sounds closer to adaptive spec at around 80ms. So for music and casual web browsing the T10 is better, but subpar for gaming. The KB9P on the other hand is subpar for music, but better for gaming.

edit: I also checked the bitrate in the qudelix app and the T10 does in fact provide variable bitrate as opposed to KB9P which is fixed to either 279 or 420kbps while providing worse sound quality regardless.

 

[losber]

Any difference between Vaorlo KB9P vs the QCC3056 version?

QCC3056 version has note "All audio codecs are only suitable for 16bits 96kHz".
Vaorlo KB9P has up to 24bit 96kHz.

 

[Spektykles]

I have 8+ Gen 1 phone with A13 too, and it doesnt have LC3 codec (despite system has necessary files/libs). Xiaomi 12S Ultra with latest beta fw. It is intentionally disabled so no happy accident here.
I asked, they (Xiaomi) said BT 5.3 and LE Audio is totally optional on that platform and will requires extra license money. And they are re-using Android 12 bluetooth stack on A13. So there is that.

 

[Spektykles]

Also if you are Chinese or know someone can buy from it, tons of QCC5171 LDAC + aptX Adaptive stuffs. Most of the stuff from Aliexpress is just Taobao rebranded and markup for foreigner

 

[O11111]

BT 5.3 and LE Audio is totally optional on that platform and will requires extra license money

Is it Qualcomm who wants more money for feature which is already here but was disabled or someone else? Well, it would be at least consistent with disabled aptX Lossless.

 

[C_Lindbergh]

Also if you are Chinese or know someone can buy from it, tons of QCC5171 LDAC + aptX Adaptive stuffs. Most of the stuff from Aliexpress is just Taobao rebranded and markup for foreigner

Yeah that's the thing, hardly worth buying from Taobao unless you buy a huge stock.

 

[C_Lindbergh]

I have 8+ Gen 1 phone with A13 too, and it doesnt have LC3 codec (despite system has necessary files/libs). Xiaomi 12S Ultra with latest beta fw. It is intentionally disabled so no happy accident here.
I asked, they (Xiaomi) said BT 5.3 and LE Audio is totally optional on that platform and will requires extra license money. And they are re-using Android 12 bluetooth stack on A13. So there is that.

Well that sucks... Is Sony the only brand that is consistent with their support of new codecs...

Despite the fact that they would have an interest to skip it given that they own LDAC.

We'll see how things will look this year with the next gen SoCs...

 

[helmutcheese]

Sony did drop all Codecs on their newer Ear/Headphone to leave you with LDAC.

I had the older overhead XM3 and they had aptX+aptX HD and LDAC.

 

[C_Lindbergh]

Sony did drop all Codecs on their newer Ear/Headphone to leave you with LDAC.

I had the older overhead XM3 and they had aptX+aptX HD and LDAC.

Ah yeah, meant source devices like phones

For their own audio products I'm guessing they're not even using any Qualcomm SoC on newer products? So not much to do there really. We'll see if they add LC3 for their next gen earphones like they've done on their phones.