silverhawknike Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Since I read an article of HTC Evo 4G LTE. This phone feature a HD voice which is support by 1X Advanced which is SVDO. Correct? Do LG Viper 4G LTE and other 4G LTE smartphones support SVDO? I read the PDF regarding 1X Advanced. there is the PDF link if you want to read http://www.howardfor...93&d=1304602440 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiWavelength Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 No, HD Voice has nothing to do with SVDO. And SVDO is not a network upgrade, per se; rather, it is a device capability. AJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverhawknike Posted April 5, 2012 Author Share Posted April 5, 2012 I see.. Hopefully, Danny Bullard will whip up a new article on HD voice soon! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irev210 Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 over at anandtech they have confirmed the codec that is being used: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5726/sprint-hd-voice-on-htc-evo-4g-lte-is-evrcnw-1x-advanced For the HTC EVO 4G LTE, HD Voice consists of one part common mode noise rejection using two microphones (something we've seen ship on high-end smartphones for a while now), and one part 1x-Advanced. I reached out to Qualcomm and asked what voice codec was being used in conjunction with Sprint's HD Voice branding on the HTC EVO 4G LTE, and learned that EVRC-NW (Service Option 73) is being used. EVRC-NW (Narrowband-Wideband), as the name suggests, includes both the EVRC-B rates with narrowband 8 KHz sampling, and EVRC-WB rates with 16 KHz sampling all under one umbrella. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drhenning Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Will HD Voice be clearer on calls to land lines??? I read something that you might need both phones to be HD Voice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffDTD Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Other threads have said that it capitalizes on the efficiency of 1x advanced... so, would expect that your phone is defaulted to only use it when it recognizes you connected via cdma 1x advanced ... a call initiated in 1xA to another party would be subject to any of the various compression standards the receiver may be using.. I would think the sprint users clarity would be high, but that probably depends on the phones settings ( whether or not it goes HD with 1xa on its end, or requires the receiver to also be 1xa). The press release says it has to be evo to evo, so we should assume the latter for now. Have also read here that 1xa 's default compression will be more similar to att and verizon than we are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverhawknike Posted April 5, 2012 Author Share Posted April 5, 2012 interesting. look like I have a lot to learn! It is smart for Sprint to "future-proofing" their network Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Slaughter Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 got word today from someone that SVDO is NOT being pursued anymore as its too costly and battery consuming...VoLTE, LTE Advanced, 1x advanced, HD Voice, and so on are whats slated with Do-Advanced being discussed still last he herd... take it for what its worth but this guy hasn't led me wrong before...hes a lil more removed from Sprint now than before so to say but still in the loop tech wise some considering who he works for supplies a component to device OEM's... imho SVDO is nothing to get all ruffled over really...and in due time with VoLTE they can do SVLTE and get the same thing in a sense from what i've briefly read... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadBroChillz Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Are they going to do SVLTE using 1xA? I love the HD Voice. It's something everyone thinks about, but no us carrier has pursued. Sprint is not leaving a stone unturned to find a way to better their network compared to AT&T/Verizon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S4GRU Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 got word today from someone that SVDO is NOT being pursued anymore as its too costly and battery consuming...VoLTE, LTE Advanced, 1x advanced, HD Voice, and so on are whats slated with Do-Advanced being discussed still last he herd... take it for what its worth but this guy hasn't led me wrong before...hes a lil more removed from Sprint now than before so to say but still in the loop tech wise some considering who he works for supplies a component to device OEM's... imho SVDO is nothing to get all ruffled over really...and in due time with VoLTE they can do SVLTE and get the same thing in a sense from what i've briefly read... SVLTE is where the future is at. Once we all are on LTE, who cares about simultaneous 3G and voice? Robert 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Slaughter Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 SVLTE is where the future is at. Once we all are on LTE, who cares about simultaneous 3G and voice? Robert exactly and with the rate of the LTE/Network Vision Deployment it makes perfect sense to what the guy told me about abandoning SVDO...just not worth it in the end... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheForce627 Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 No, HD Voice has nothing to do with SVDO. And SVDO is not a network upgrade, per se; rather, it is a device capability. AJ i wonder why they dont put this in more phones off topic but can you check your dm. i sent you something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Slaughter Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 i wonder why they dont put this in more phones off topic but can you check your dm. i sent you something Costly and not worth it. Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenChase7 Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 Costly and not worth it. Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk I always thought it was overrated, myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyroscott Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 I can't say that I have ever felt the need to use both voice and data at the same time. Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacinJosh Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 I can't say that I have ever felt the need to use both voice and data at the same time. Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk Simultaneous voice & data is the one and only thing I really miss since I left at&t. I do get it with WiMax every so often, but not enough, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deval Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I can't say that I have ever felt the need to use both voice and data at the same time. Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk Me neither, but I ported my girlfriend's family over from T-mobile and AT&T to Sprint (all iPhones now), and the one comment they all made was that they got used to sim-voice/data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyroscott Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Me neither, but I ported my girlfriend's family over from T-mobile and AT&T to Sprint (all iPhones now), and the one comment they all made was that they got used to sim-voice/data. Maybe part of my reasoning is that I only use about 200 minutes per month. That isn't a whole lot of time to feel deprived of the internet. I'm sure I would get used to it if I had it and then miss it if it was gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deval Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Maybe part of my reasoning is that I only use about 200 minutes per month. That isn't a whole lot of time to feel deprived of the internet. I'm sure I would get used to it if I had it and then miss it if it was gone. LOL...good point. Though I carry 2 phones daily, so I get "sim voice/data", just with 2 phones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyroscott Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 LOL...good point. Though I carry 2 phones daily, so I get "sim voice/data", just with 2 phones Genius Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4ringsnbr Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Other threads have said that it capitalizes on the efficiency of 1x advanced... so, would expect that your phone is defaulted to only use it when it recognizes you connected via cdma 1x advanced ... a call initiated in 1xA to another party would be subject to any of the various compression standards the receiver may be using.. I would think the sprint users clarity would be high, but that probably depends on the phones settings ( whether or not it goes HD with 1xa on its end, or requires the receiver to also be 1xa). The press release says it has to be evo to evo, so we should assume the latter for now. Have also read here that 1xa 's default compression will be more similar to att and verizon than we are now. 1xA's default vocoder is EVRC-B, which is the standard for Verizon in most areas. Some people prefer it over EVRC, and it does sound very good, but I personally prefer EVRC. AT&T uses an AMR vocoder though upgraded from GSM's horrible original versions, it's still very, very poor in comparison. There are newer AMR versions with "HD voice" capabilities that Verizon plans to use when rolling out VoLTE this October. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkrodgers Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 SVLTE is where the future is at. Once we all are on LTE, who cares about simultaneous 3G and voice? Robert Not only that, but until we get there, we should have simultaneous voice and LTE, just like we do with WiMax, right? And maybe with a lower frequency that provides better indoor signals, hopefully a better LTE footprint with fewer gaps, better chipsets in the phones, and bigger batteries like in the Evo LTE, leaving LTE on all the time will be more viable. Simultaneous 3G and voice would be nice for fallback, but if it diverts resources from more long term efforts, it makes sense for them to skip it. If it could be done at minimal cost as a part of the upgrades, that'd be one thing, but it sounds like that's not the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiWavelength Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Simultaneous 3G and voice would be nice for fallback, but if it diverts resources from more long term efforts, it makes sense for them to skip it. If it could be done at minimal cost as a part of the upgrades, that'd be one thing, but it sounds like that's not the case. As has been stated many times, SVDO is not a network upgrade, so it does not add cost nor divert resources. Rather, SVDO is a device capability, typically enabled through separate modems for CDMA1X and EV-DO. AJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Slaughter Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 As has been stated many times, SVDO is not a network upgrade, so it does not add cost nor divert resources. Rather, SVDO is a device capability, typically enabled through separate modems for CDMA1X and EV-DO. AJ Not a routine "cost" but there's still a cost for having it on the handset hardware... Though that previous "cost" with having to add the MDM chip to achieve this feature is somewhat mitigated by using the new S4 chips evidently... There's always a cost for things one way or another to an extent. I do wonder the amount of difference in data used on VZ once they introduced SVDO handsets versus how it was before...personally I'd think the difference would be negligible but u never know as having the ability to do it might drive more data use than before... Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiWavelength Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 1xA's default vocoder is EVRC-B, which is the standard for Verizon in most areas. Some people prefer it over EVRC, and it does sound very good, but I personally prefer EVRC. AT&T uses an AMR vocoder though upgraded from GSM's horrible original versions, it's still very, very poor in comparison. There are newer AMR versions with "HD voice" capabilities that Verizon plans to use when rolling out VoLTE this October. It is important to note, however, that EVRC-NW "HD Voice" does not require Network Vision nor CDMA1X Advanced; EVRC-NW is based on the same 9.6 kbps Rate Set 1 as is EVRC. "HD Voice" comes from greater voice data compression, not from higher rate voice data. So, as long as the BSC/MSC has been updated to decode, transcode, or pass EVRC-NW as necessary, then "HD Voice" should be functional even in those markets that Network Vision has not yet reached. AJ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.