Fraunhofer IIS Demos Full-HD Voice Over LTE On Android

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fraunhofer IIS Demos Full-HD Voice Over LTE On Android

Posted by timothy on Saturday February 25, 2012 @08:29AM from the smell-o-vision-lite dept.

MojoKid writes "Fraunhofer IIS has chosen Mobile World Congress as the place to present the world's first Full-HD Voice mobile phone calls over an LTE network. Verizon Wireless has toyed with VoLTE (Voice over LTE) before, but this particular method enables mobile phone calls to sound as clear as talking to another person in the same room. Full-HD Voice is already established in several VoIP, video telephony and conferencing systems. However, this will mark the first time Fraunhofer's Full-HD Voice codec AAC-ELD has been integrated into a mobile communications system. Currently, the majority of phone calls are limited to the 3.5 kHz range, whereas humans are able to perceive audio signals up to 20 kHz. The Full-HD Voice codec AAC-ELD gives access to the full audible audio spectrum."

12 of 99 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

can you hear me now? by noh8rz2 · 2012-02-25 08:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

wow this sounds really cool. I think it's so lame that as technology improved in the past 15 years and we went from landlines to cell phones, we took a huge step back in audio quality. Kind of like the step back from CDs to MP3s. I hope this catches on - do both parties need to use it? Perhaps it will be directly implemented in Skype or something.
1. Re:can you hear me now? by King+InuYasha · 2012-02-25 08:36 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Four parties need to support this for it to work: the caller's handset, the caller's mobile network operator, the recipient's mobile network operator, and the recipient's handset. If all four support the Full HD Voice codec for IMS-Voice (aka VoLTE), then it'll be used. Otherwise, it'll fall back to AMR-WB or AMR-NB.
2. Re:can you hear me now? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-25 08:38 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Skype currently uses the SILK codec, which should give similar quality.
  Skype was also involved with the IETF working group to produce a new codec (called Opus) which is also high quality and will hopefully see more widespread adoption than this AAC-ELD codec.
  Would be interested in seeing some comparisons between Opus and AAC-ELD, especially since Opus can do both voice and music due to its hybrid nature.
3. Re:can you hear me now? by dgatwood · 2012-02-25 09:35 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Saying that FLAC is better than MP3 is like saying that an M1A1 is better than a smart car. If you care only about getting something from point A to point B undamaged, then yes, it is. If you care at all about efficiency, not so much.
  As for Ogg Vorbis, I suspect the patent FUD spread by Fraunhofer pretty much sealed its fate as far as commercial vendor adoption was concerned, which in turn has limited its uptake by the general public.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
4. Re:can you hear me now? by jmv · 2012-02-25 09:57 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  We actually wanted to compare Opus and AAC-ELD, but there was just no way to actually get an AAC-ELD implementation. The best we were able to do is to get an AAC-LD implementation from Apple. See this demo page (scroll down) for the comparison we did between AAC-LD and CELT (which is now part of Opus). In the very few modes we had access to, CELT (Opus) was clearly superior to AAC-LD. I've no idea how much better AAC-ELD is.
  
  --
  Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
5. Re:can you hear me now? by MartinSchou · 2012-02-25 15:03 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Saying that FLAC is better than MP3 is like saying that an M1A1 is better than a smart car. If you care only about getting something from point A to point B undamaged, then yes, it is.
  Okay, I get your point, but you picked a rather unfortunate comparison.
  1) Getting a parking space? Never an issue with the M1A1, even when all the lots are filled ...
  2) Traffic jams? Shouldn't be a problem with the M1A1 either ...
  3) Tail gaters? .50 cal machine gun and 120 mm cannon!
  4) People cutting you off in traffic? See 3.
  5) Getting T-boned in an intersection? Yeah, you might get banged about a bit, but I suspect the M1A1 will do just fine unless it's an 18-wheeler or bigger.
  6) Are the local roads washed out by inclement weather? The M1A1 will still get you there. (I even suspect there'd be no real danger in driving straight through tornadoes and hurricanes in an M1A1).
  7) Is there a foot of snow covering your local roads? Debris from the recent hurricane or tornado blocking the roads? The M1A1 will still get you there.
  It's not difficult to think up even plausible ways that an M1A1 is better for your commute than a SmartCar.
  But your point still stands.
Re:Full HD? by Albanach · 2012-02-25 08:41 · Score: 4, Informative

Full HD is a marketing term referring to 1080p-resolution content/screens. Why is it being used here? How does it make any sense whatsoever?
It makes every bit as much (or as little) sense here as it does when used to describe a television.
What good is HD-voice quality... by SeaFox · 2012-02-25 08:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

...when the phones have shit sound components.
Handset makers have been so focused on stuffing their handsets with cameras, MP3 playback, video playback, picture messaging and other dumb things in a features race that they only phone-in (pun intended) the basic voice calling capabilities now.
Re:It'd make me finally buy a smart cellphone by fyngyrz · 2012-02-25 09:11 · Score: 4, Informative

No. It really doesn't -- I've heard them many times, and the telephone audio sounds pretty much like every other phone, like over-compressed trash. The very minimum for "decent voice audio" requires *everything* between about 300 Hz and 3 KHz to reproduced accurately. That's the old POTS analog phone standard, by the way. And it would be lovely if it were more like 100 Hz to about 6 KHz - tons more nuance available with that kind of range.

--
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Awesome! by digsbo · 2012-02-25 09:13 · Score: 4, Funny

I can make phone calls with my phone now!
humans are able to perceive audio up to 20 kHz... by John+Hasler · 2012-02-25 09:33 · Score: 4, Interesting

Only those who have not had high-intensity hoot and thump music piped into their ear canals for the last ten years. Most twentysomethings won't be able distinguish HD audio from a 1940s telephone. They'll buy it anyway, though.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:"Full HD" - right by SeaFox · 2012-02-25 09:53 · Score: 4, Insightful
It's actually a variant of H.264/MPEG-4 AVC, which is the codec on Blu-Ray audio. But not at a high bit rate, as on Blu-Ray discs. It's AAC/ELD v2, at 24Kb/s.
It's already in IOS Facetime, anyway.
This post doesn't make any sense.
1. H.264 is a video codec, it has nothing to do with the audio on a bluray disc. Blu-ray discs use a wide variety of sound formats, from 24-bit PCM Mono, all the way to 7.1 Lossless codecs.
2. You don't have to use H.264 to be "Full HD". "Full HD" is nothing more than a marketing term to start with, but it only refers to 1080p video. Early Blurays used MPEG2 for video codec and still did 1080p resolution.
3. Facetime doesn't use AAC/ELD, but only AAC/LD, which doesn't go as low in frequency.