AT&T voice quality

[mobilewoman1]

Why is ATT voice quality better than Verizon? Will Verizon catch up with att in this category? Does Verizon Crippled the phones more than att?

thanks

[CA]

Why is ATT voice quality better than Verizon? Will Verizon catch up with att in this category? Thanks

Sure they will, they have a massive jump with Lte and it's eventual end, VoLte. If ATT in fact has better voice quality it's a very recent event. Where were you when ATT abused the HR codec?

[mobilewoman1]

I know next to nothing about the technology. What is HR codec

[mpossoff]

Sure they will, they have a massive jump with Lte and it's eventual end, VoLte. If ATT in fact has better voice quality it's a very recent event. Where were you when ATT abused the HR codec?

What matters is AT&T voice is better than VZW.

[CA]

What matters is AT&T voice is better than VZW.

Is it, I can't tell the difference? But to some "Now" is a fleeting moment, or a least should be judged by a 2 year contract at a time! Anyway I look at it, in my line of work that carrier crap causes headaches, so I've learned that I need both, and have both.

User testing, and polls, don't really give anyone a clear picture enough to proclaim. People only use their handset in limited areas even though they say that they are globe Trotters {sic}

"Now" I breath, yesterday it was difficult, and tomorrow I may not.
Author CA.

[mpossoff]

It's been noted that VZW voice sounds robotic.

[Volaris]

It's been noted that VZW voice sounds robotic.

I agree with this, perhaps not all the time but many times it does sound this way. However, I find that no worse than what AT&T used to be back when everyone had an original iPhone on their overloaded GSM network! Back then voice was so bad I couldn't even record my own voicemail greeting and could never understand half of what my boss was saying over the phone, lol. (we both had AT&T). 3G fixed these issues, though.

[zephxiii]

ATT uses a different codec that has better audio tonality and is pretty consistent. VZW can sound like crap because of the lower bitrate they sometimes use and i've heard this a lot from some areas, though they usually sound fine in my area but still not as full compared to calling another ATT or Tmobile user.

Here is a voice quality rating comparison using "...POLQA speech quality algorithm over the three carriers' networks.":
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ar_victor.html

Sure they will, they have a massive jump with Lte and it's eventual end, VoLte. If ATT in fact has better voice quality it's a very recent event. Where were you when ATT abused the HR codec?

Recent? HR was on GSM only and we've been running UMTS phones for quite a while now

[CA]

ATT uses a different codec that has better audio tonality and is pretty consistent. VZW can sound like crap because of the lower bitrate they sometimes use and i've heard this a lot from some areas, though they usually sound fine in my area but still not as full compared to calling another ATT or Tmobile user.

Here is a voice quality rating comparison using "...POLQA speech quality algorithm over the three carriers' networks.":
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ar_victor.html




Recent? HR was on GSM only and we've been running UMTS phones for quite a while now

Now, that shows your age, when we get older we think in terms of decades, not the last time you got ....!

And as far as the first part, I always thought that Verizon Voice at full steam ahead was much better than what you get on the GSM side. And that in areas where Verizon is past it's capacity they deploy a less than ideal codec. ATT just abused HR, unlike TMO.

Then again I liked Sprints QOS!

[mpossoff]

I agree with this, perhaps not all the time but many times it does sound this way. However, I find that no worse than what AT&T used to be back when everyone had an original iPhone on their overloaded GSM network! Back then voice was so bad I couldn't even record my own voicemail greeting and could never understand half of what my boss was saying over the phone, lol. (we both had AT&T). 3G fixed these issues, though.

That was then this is now.

[DRC72]

Voice quality varies around the country, but from what I've been reading lately Verizon's voice quality has issues around the country. Muffled and robotic sounding.. I'm sure LTE voice will address all that. AT&T's voice quality has been much improved for a long time now, at least in my area. I now text mostly with my Verizon friends, Verizon 3G voice sounds like crap around here.

[Jordan T]

Voice quality is as much subjective as objective. Nobody has actually answered your question. The difference is how the voice is encoded, and also how errors are handled in poor signal areas.

Excellent quality reproduction of compressed audio requires approximately 128 kbits of data to encode one second of one channel of audio (128 kbps/ch). At that level, with a good "codec" (math algorithm it's encoded with) essentially no one can tell the difference between the compressed audio and a CD with most content. At 64 kbps/ch most people cannot tell the difference with pop, rock, etc.

Cell phone networks use under 13 kbps (it's only one channel). The "HR" people above are referring to means half-rate and it's going to 6kbps. Unlike a certain someone thinks, that's NOT a strictly AT&T phenomena. Verizon runs 8 kbps all the time. AT&T will run 13 kbps most of the time unless needed for load. Not only that, but AMR (the codec used on AT&T's network) is designed and tested to sound similar in quality at 6 kbps to EVRC (Verizon's codec) at 8 kbps. However, they will sound very different. Which is better is very highly subjective.

Another factor is re-encoding loss. Especially if the codec is different. Thus calls between networks (especially networks using different technologies) will always sound worse than calls on the same network (thus AT&T to AT&T and Verizon to Verizon will both generally sound much better than AT&T to Verizon). Calls to landlines are best, though still compressed in a VoIP world, the bitrates are much higher, thus there's only one extremely aggressive compression not two.

All this is to say, compression is the main reason. But good luck getting a consensus on who sounds best. It's NOT just about area or luck. It also has a lot to do with the individual listening to the call, and the quality of audio processing in their phone. To my ears, AT&T sounds clearer. But Verizon sounds a bit cleaner. I think this is an artifact of over-aggressive noise reduction in an attempt to reduce the required bitrate. Personally, I don't care. I use so little voice anyways. Compress the heck out of it and save the bandwidth for my data, please

[plane]

Could it be the quality of the speaker/earpiece of the handset?

IMO, from time to time I've had issues with both the att and the cdma types. I currently use both att and vzw and by chance picked up a vzw home connect device, which I use with both cordless and corded handsets, and prefer the home connect connect devices to either variety of cell phones while talking.

Also, while in my car, I always to use a bluetooth connection to my car audio system, for the same reasons.

[milan03]

What matters is AT&T voice is better than VZW.

This is an incredibly scientific statement. Thanks for your deep input.
On a side note, Jordan T pretty much nailed it.

[Wireless Junkie]

What matters is AT&T voice is better than VZW.

Hah, maybe in your area. Its pathetic here. Sprint beats out both because AT&T and Verizon use horrible half rate voice codecs.