his portion from a document may explain why RLT values can depend on codec:

AMR provides robust codecs (e.g. AFS4,75, AFS5,9) that allow the network to operate at low
C/R values and still to provide sufficient voice quality. On another side, error protection
scheme for SACCH (FACCH) was designed for the network using FR and HR speech traffic
that can't cope with interference level in AMR networks. This performance imbalance
between SACCH (FACCH) and lower AMR FR codec modes appears as increased number of
call drops due to expiry of the Radio Link Timeout timer while speech quality is reasonably
good.
The problem has been solved by introducing RLT counter for UL and DL whose initial values
are separately configurable for different Service Groups within Power Control object, e.g.:
- higher value for RLT for AMR calls
- lower value for RLT for non-AMR calls

Karan Singh - 7th September 2011

(13:10 GMT)

Hi,
AMR Value for RLT is a little bigger as compared to Non AMR, hence you can find that GSM
HR RLT set as 28 & AMR HR set as 32 in few systems, this is because in worse c/i conditions
AMR is expected to perform better thereby giving a greater chance to the end user to
establish his call again in bad radio.

Vanderley - 14th August 2006

(14:15 GMT)

SACCH is the same, the speech improves

Pix - 11th August 2006

(02:29 GMT)

The SACCH degrades ? How come ? It's nice if you can explain because I'm not familiar with
the SACCH frames contents and the way it is processed...

Vanderley - 10th August 2006

(14:14 GMT)

I think that SACCH coding is better than AMR FR8 codec anyway. Also the information in
SACCH is equally important to EFR; AMR, etc.
There is no reason to have good speech and no TA or system info.

suresh - 10th August 2006

(05:22 GMT)

Due to better coding in AMR, the speech quality is improved but the SACCH degrades.
Hence you find that the call drops even though the speech may be good.

Pix - 6th August 2006

(03:46 GMT)

in alcatel, the RLT is set identical for all codecs and all frequency ba