BenKatz
100+ Head-Fier
On the receiver side (headphone or speaker), it is effectively necessary to have dedicated hardware. A manufacturer will not implement codecs but will purchase a Bluetooth chip with codecs already integrated (aptX, aptX HD, LDAC). For example, if you were building a headphone you would buy a Bluetooth chip with aptX like this or with aptX HD like this, and you will have to pay Qualcomm and/or Sony licensing fees. Qualcomm has a huge marketing advantage to promote aptX HD because so many manufacturers are already licensing aptX.
Well, firstly, we already had this discussion a few pages back. From a consumer perspective, it doesn't boil down to Qualcomm's market share, it's about what quality you want. LDAC is capable of 30% wider bandwidth (and, hence, sound quality), so it's up to the consumer what they want to buy, since as of now, all LDAC devices, be them transmitters or receiver (from Sony mostly) also have aptx codecs anyway. They don't directly compete, since they are different quality products. It's like in cars. On manufacturer makes a slower car, another one a faster car. The consumer choses what they want to pay, there's a market for both. And considering Sony's corporate power, AND the fact that unlike the format wars, this doesn't inlcude any hardware manufacturing, but is only a codec (code), Sony can keep LDAC avaiable, at least for their product line, forever if they want. And they should, since I'd always chose LDAC over aptx HD, until something faster than LDAC appears.
As far as I know, from reading a discussion about the Pixel and iPhone, it's just codecs. Pixel and iPhone don't have aptx support (codec, as it's actually called, they don't call it aptx/ldac "chip"), however they share the same bluetooth transmitter chip (made by intel i believe) with many many other smartphones that have aptx or LDAC (my Xperia has a generic intel bt chip, but has both aptx and ldac codecs).
Here's Sony's official LDAC explanation, where they specifically say that it's an Audio coding technology, no dedicated hardware, it just needs capable hardware (bt 4.0 +) for it to work.
https://www.sony.net/Products/LDAC/
Qualcomm may sell their own BT chips, because they manufacture them, and already incorporate aptx on them for interested manufacturers, however that doesn't make the aptx CODEC a hardware. Intel also sells bt chips, with aptx or not, and LDAC. It would make no sense for the BT chip manufacturer to take responsibility in installing all the possible BT codecs on their hardware. It's up to either the smartphone manufacturer, or the software one to incorporate it in the firmware. This is why Google is going to incorporate LDAC and APTX HD in Android O, if it were a hardware deal, they wouldn't care about doing it, since it would make no sense.
Also, here's a XDA forum, where a user flashed a modified software on his Samsung smartphone (S3) that didn't have APTx in order to activate it (basically a software with the aptx code incorporated) and it worked. Further proof that all bt codecs are just that - codecs. I found no information online about specific APTX or LDAC hardware, but I found a ton of information describing them as codecs, and tests such as this one below where they can be incorporated on existing hardware:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/ga...comparison-t1933527/post32708229#post32708229
Last edited: