Wow. Sarcasm much?
In my last several posts I have agreed that for some LDAC won't matter because it isn't supported on their phones.
I have and will continue to disagree with calling LDAC snake oil or marketing hype as I do prefer it. But I also acknowledged that others might not agree.
Seems that may have offended. Not my intent.
I happened upon this thread hoping to see what I could learn about the XM5. Probably will come back another time
Knowledge comes from discussion.
Let's not be afraid of it.
One of the purposes of a lossy audio codec is to achieve perceptual audio transparency.
As many tests over the years shown, transparency is achieved by correct codec design and implementation, not amount of bitrate.
It's a general knowledge that modern implementation audio codecs at bitrates above 300 kbps in 99,999% are perceptually transparent.
So, in those terms; making an audio lossy codec at 900kbps, one can say it is in fact a "snake oil".
If there is an audible difference in the final product between those codecs; it must be purposeful by the designing company.
I will say that for me, ldac is more metallic but has a bit more air to it.
I'm also aware, that this can be a placebo, because of the lag when switching, and the fact that I know I'm switching it.
I would argue, differences if any, are because headphones are designed this way.
Not because of codec quality.
Which is entirely my point.