Bluetooth: Does SBC Deserve its Bad Reputation? Is AptX/AAC Really Better? 2019-10-20 16:04:37 The lowest-common-denominator SBC codec for Bluetooth seems to have a bad reputation in audiophile circles. At medium quality (~220 kbps; the default on older versions of Android), it indeed does sound terrible and I was able to ABX it easily when I tried a few months back. At high quality (~320 kbps; the default on modern Android versions), though, it sounds fine to me in casual listening and I couldn't ABX it when I tried a while back. SoundExperts.org listening tests seem to give it high marks at this bitrate. Do others here also find the high bitrate SBC settings transparent and suspect SBC's bad reputation comes entirely from old devices that chose too low a bitrate?AptX and AAC are marketed as improvements over SBC. Are there any listening tests to prove that these actually sound better than high-bitrate (~320 kbps) SBC, or is this mostly marketing hype? Also, isn't AAC significantly more power-hungry than SBC, leading to potentially worse battery life?