Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The key word there being analog phone lines. Cell phone lines, which account for 99.99999% of all phone communication these days, are IMO worse than VOIP for sound quality (though better at latency). It's weird that kids growing up in the post-landline era will never realize how clear and amazingly low-latency phone calls used to be. If two people were seated across a table talking on a landline, they'd hear the signal from the phone before they heard it over the air.


"The key word there being analog phone lines."

No, the key words are uncompressed and non-packetized. The best telephone voice quality ever was ISDN from handset to handset. Digital end to end, 64Kb/s without compression, and rigidly clocked at the bit level. No noise. No jitter. Switzerland had ISDN to the home for years. Also, in Europe, there was power over ISDN, so the phone didn't need AC power or batteries. A friend there was annoyed when they forced him to convert to inferior VoIP, which, even over fiber, is worse.


In Ireland, until _weirdly recently_, after ISDN had died out for pretty much all other purposes, every government minister got an ISDN phone installed in their house, to make them easier to interview in the radio.


Cellular phones used to sound good back when they were FM and not packetized, as well.


Low-latency for local calls, yes. High quality sound, also yes.

But for long distance, no thank you. I will not go back to the 90s just for that one reason alone. It was hellish calling across the Atlantic. Like 15 cents a minute with a 1.5 (sometimes 2) second delay between speaking. And having to remember the dialling sequences and complexity around looking up foreign phone numbers, both of which are now just built into the cell phone.

Or having to trudge around in the rain for a phone booth and having to page through a worn out phone book just to make some dinner reservations. Yuck. I'll take the bluetooth shenanigans, thank you.


Or having to trudge around in the rain for a phone booth and having to page through a worn out phone book just to make some dinner reservations. Yuck.

Pretending like this was the only way to make a dinner reservation reminds me of the juice loosener informercial from the Simpsons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viejY6UZ5Bk


I didn't pretend it was the only way, I was saying that there are times when one is out and needs to make reservations or call the wife that went into labour or call work after a car broke down. These were actual, real things people did back then. Thankfully I'm young enough to only have had to do it for a couple of years, but I do not have Merry England syndrome around what phones were like in the mid nineties.

Even caller id is a major win on its own.


In the 90ies I used 'calling cards' to 'dial in' to Frankfurt, and then via touch tone entry of the real number to Florida. Interestingly that wasn't only ridiculously cheap, but much better quality than dialed directly via my native Telco/ISP. Also no latency, sounded almost as good as native ISDN.


Audio quality on cellular is widely variable. If both ends support VoLTE/HD Voice, the audio quality is actually superior to analog.


VoLTE with fancy compression didn't make audio quality better, it just freed up bandwidth for carriers to cram more channels in. This has repeated for every single "improvement" in VoIP technology over its ~40 year history, the tradeoff always goes in the direction of making more money instead of offering better service.


VoLTE doesn't do it on its own.

If you're calling within the same carrier with "HD voice", AMR-WB at 12.65kbps scores a higher MOS than old-school G.711 64kbps PCM (and is more pleasing in some ways that the MOS doesn't capture).

Sure, if they'd just give us another couple dang kilobits/second it'd be way better still, but...

At this point, the bandwidth used for voice is pretty much irrelevant from a cellular capacity planning point of view-- people use >5GB/month on average and 24/7 12kbps calling is less than 5GB/month.


> VoLTE with fancy compression didn't make audio quality better, it just freed up bandwidth for carriers to cram more channels in.

Not just that, it’s also used for additional carrier lock-in!

(In Canada, carriers were barred from selling carrier-locked phones some years ago, but since VoLTE, they don’t support VoLTE functionality on any phones that haven’t been certified for use on their network, which is limited, in practice, to phone models that they sell themselves. Normally this means you fallback to 3G for calling, unless you happen to be roaming with a carrier/country where 3G service has been dropped, in which case you simply don’t get any voice service.)


I'd like to experience that. I've never had a cellular voice connection that was even remotely as good as the old analog PSTN.


It's wild when I'm talking to family on Signal, which seems to run high quality VoIP even on a non-VoLTE-capable phone. (and the hardware seems to be VoLTE-capable, just Sprint never released the appropriate modem firmware _in my market_, and I've been unsuccessful at hacking apart a rom from india...)

But as nice as the quality may be, the latency still sucks. It's just the nature of the beast.


I have to agree. People forget how many frequencies made it through the Bell System and the wire lines. Maybe long ago it was 100% analog, but somewhere along the way they started adding in digital compression and that usually meant stripping out all but the most important frequencies. There were several decades when a dial phone to dial phone call produced pretty horrible accoustics.


Sure but somehow I've only experienced that a handful of times so it's not very "actually superior" in my actual life.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: