1

I want to purchase a new pair of Bluetooth earphones which support DD+ (E-AC-3 JOC) and LDAC, among others. However, I am finding it hard to understand this.

I want to be able to use DD+ for movie audio and high bitrates ideally for music, but does my laptop also need to support DD+?

I've heard that it does, but it doesn't make sense to me, if an audio file is encoded with DD+/LDAC, then all the device would have to do is send the binary to the earphones to be decoded, right? Why would it have to support it?

The earphones are: Sony WF-1000MX5 The Laptop is: Dell XPS 15 9530

2
  • Dolby Digital, in any form, is not a supported codec in Bluetooth A2DP or Bluetooth LE Audio. The Sony WF-1000MX5 certainly don’t support it.
    – Daniel B
    Commented Apr 19 at 11:40
  • @DanielB Yeah, I was misled by this article, this has been so confusing to research. Could I play a DDP file as LDAC to take advantage of the high DDP bitrate? Not sure if that's how it works.
    – Aph002
    Commented Apr 20 at 5:33

1 Answer 1

1

Yes, your computer Bluetooth stack absolutely needs to support the codec you wish to use on your headset.

The codec is the audio format that is transmitted "over air" from the computer and then decoded by the receiver.

Bluetooth does not have the bandwidth to transmit raw audio data, hence it requires encoding before transmission hence we use various codecs (encoder deccoder).

Historically Bluetooth "client" devices such as headsets were never expected to have any significant processing power and were never expected to be able to decode things like mp3, mp4 or so on. Instead they were given an audio codec that achieved reasonable quality with very limited processing power. SBC.

A device sending Bluetooth audio was expected to do all the decoding itself, creating essentially a raw unencoded audio stream, which it then re-encoded in the format understood by Bluetooth devices.

One problem with Windows is that most drivers for Bluetooth are made to be cheap rather than good, and so they tend to only support the "standard" bluetooth codec which is SBC. SBC is not intended to be fast, neither is it particularly high quality.

Since its creation a few more codecs have been added such as aptX, aptX HD (high definition), aptX LL (low latency, LDAC (lossless digital audio codec) and so on, all trading speed, quality and bandwidth to achieve a goal of better audio, lower latency or so on.

There is an alternative Bluetooth driver for Windows that supports LDAC but it is paid software with a trial.

DD+ (Dolby Digital Plus) claims to be built into Windows 10 and Edge but I have no way to verify that it is actually available as a Bluetooth codec that can be used to transmit data to headphones.

Phones tend to support better audio codecs by default, which the manufacturer has to pay the licence costs for, because we are far more likely to connect Bluetooth headsets to them. Bluetooth is very bandwidth limited and currently does not support high quality bi-directional audio, as in using a microphone at the same time as playing high quality audio, and in the PC space we tend to prefer dedicated wireless headsets with their own proprietary audio transmitters and receivers.

Bluetooth also has significant latency as the audio has to be encoded, transmitted and decoded. One company estimated that latency at anywhere between 30 to 200 milliseconds.

For just playing audio such as music or films Bluetooth can be fine as if you know the latency of your system you can compensate by delaying video frames, but for gaming where you require low latency high quality audio in both directions you can end up with audio being significantly delayed from what you see on screen.

8
  • I'm finding this topic unusually confusing, just so I understand the theory, If I download an audio file in X codec, why would the laptop have to encode anything? The files already encoded, and the earphone decodes. Secondly, is this a scam? Why are earphones so expensive if so many devices won't let you listen to any high bitrate audio? Thanks.
    – Aph002
    Commented Apr 19 at 6:52
  • @Aph002 As an mp3 the file is encoded in a way that optimises compression. Back when Bluetooth was designed the amount of memory and CPU power required to support lots of audio formats would have made headsets far more expensive. They also wanted to limit bandwidth to reduce radio complexity. So they went the (slightly crap) route of letting the transmitting device send the end results of playing audio to a Bluetooth device. Because of the low bandwidth they needed to re-encode the audio and because of the cpu issues it needed to be low power, hence we ended up with what we got for years.
    – Mokubai
    Commented Apr 19 at 8:01
  • Bluetooth is essentially the result of years of committees and engineers trying and failing to fix a flawed system that they cant simply replace because it is too ubiquitous. It is literally everywhere in every phone. What we end up with is bolt-ons for high quality audio that aren't supported by every device, codecs that only work within particular manufacturers equipment (Samsung Scalable codec supported by their own headsets and phones but no one else) or codecs that need licencing in order for them to be used (AptX - Qualcom, LDAC - Sony).
    – Mokubai
    Commented Apr 19 at 8:08
  • Bluetooth might have been a good solution to a collection of problems we had nearly 30 years ago, but now it is holding back the world with poor support, restricted options for audio output and quality due to patchy support across devices, atrocious latency issues, and generally limited bandwidth. To be fair the limited bandwidth does make it more power efficient, but it holds everything else back. It's about time we ditched it and remade something better from the ground up.
    – Mokubai
    Commented Apr 19 at 8:14
  • @Aph002 I have added more detail to my answer.
    – Mokubai
    Commented Apr 19 at 11:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .