this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
819 points (99.6% liked)

Programmer Humor

20140 readers
1569 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago

"On 17 September 2019, the Japan Audio Society (JAS) certified LDAC with their Hi-Res Audio Wireless certification."

Something something oxymoron. Bluetooth is trash, its why I still use wired whenever I can.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (4 children)

To my knowledge it's lossless in CD quality only, in high-res modes it becomes lossy

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

FLAC is a lossless compression format. It will reduce file size but keeps the audio quality. So-called "high-res" format on streaming platform like spotify (mandatory fuck spotify here) are usually mp3 320kbps so heavily compressed and lossy, indeed.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (20 children)

Ignorant of the subject matter, but I ripped a bunch of CDs to FLAC some time ago. Would that not work for this purpose?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

Bluetooth has fairly low bitrate which also helps save power. The throughput will also vary with signal quality. It needs to somehow adjust to worse conditions, otherwise it will just keep cutting out. Streaming CD quality FLAC could probably be done over Bluetooth 5 2M PHY, but 2Mbps is just the physical layer. There's also some overhead. Perhaps just enough would be left, but the bitrate will also vary with the content. Not everything can be compressed much, while some audio can be compressed quite a bit.

Probably would work, but the reliability is also a question.

Anyway, just guessing. Perhaps the 3Mbps EDR could be used just fine.

Oh, Bluetooth 3.0 + HS could do 24Mbps. Sort of. It used WiFi to do that.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My favorite is most people are listening to already lossy compressed music that gets decoded and then recompressed in another lossy manner… I miss my cable sometimes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

In the end, I found I don't really care that much, since lossy Bluetooth works well enough for earbuds on the go, and good old cables are still available for more serious listening.

Plus, the truth is that most people can't tell the difference between lossy and lossless without doing A/B testing, and some can't tell even with that

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›