search for: pesq

Francois Menard (Mailing List Account) wrote: > > did you try speex in wideband mode ... what bitrate? > > f. 15kbps mode. It does significantly better with a different speaker (the male does better than the female), as well. I'm considering purchasing a commercial PESQ license and wrap the PESQ software in a server application. I could then allow other folks to run PESQ comparisons on my server through some API, either for free or for a fee. (ie, commercial customers for $$, open source & hoby-ists for free)... I'm hoping this might allow Speex & s...

...x with reference to filesize (which is a bit weird, since the encoded g711-files are 6 times larger than the original wave files - but this is another matter), MoS value, and a subjective opinion, wether I can still understand the file, or not. The MoS value is (or rather *should be*) calculated by PESQ (ITU P.862: http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-P.862/en). (I know the pesq scale ranges from -0,5 - 4,5, where MoS is usually from 0 - 5) *Pesq Settings:* R2a: Sampling Rate: 8kHz, Overall bit rate: 80kbit/s R3: Sampling Rate: 16kHz, Overall bit rate: 96kbit/s *Pesq Results:* R2a (mode 2) of G711 retur...

Hello! Some time back, I added the Speex protocol to my version of VOCAL (www.vovida.org, VOIP tool). Recently, I also added PESQ (automated voice quality testing algorithm) to my tool and have been running some tests on a clean network. The source file is a woman reading some phrases meant to test various aspects of codecs... Speex has a respectable result of 3.67 Some other codecs I've tested: g.729: 3.78 g.726-1...

...gt; 15kbps mode. It does significantly better with a different > speaker (the male does better than the female), as well. Most CELP based codecs do a better job with lower pitched voices, so male voices tend to sound better than female voices. > I'm considering purchasing a commercial PESQ license and wrap > the PESQ software in a server application. I could then allow > other folks to run PESQ comparisons on my server through some API, > either for free or for a fee. (ie, commercial customers for $$, > open source & hoby-ists for free)... I have mixed feelings abo...

...y of Congress 202-707-0535 http://www.loc.gov/nls The preceding opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Library of Congress, NLS. From: Oliver Martin [mailto:scholl3ss93 at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:04 PM To: Rasmussen, Lloyd Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] PESQ calculated MoS-Values for Speex Thanks for your fast answer Lloyd. I would rate mode4 of speex with 4 and mode2 with 4. (MoS) I can't hear a huge difference between both, except that mode4 files have more bass-parts (I guess because they are wideband encoded). I recorded the files on a RME R...

...ms framesize for mode=AUDIO at a bitrate of about 28000. > Quality drops audibly for voice signals when encoded at 20ms > framesize, versus quality at 10ms. This effect is mode=AUDIO only. > Using mode==VOIP shows no sig. difference between 10 and 20ms framing > at this bitrate. Pesq totally overreacts, as it is wont to do :) > However, I do hear a slight drop. Admittedly, 28kbps is a low bitrate > to be running in mode=AUDIO. Is this effect known? Is there a > difference in processing with audio mode between 10ms and (other > framesizes)? I reckon it will go...

Hi Jean-Marc, Sorry for late reply, thanks for interest. It's quality good for 10ms/audio, poorer for 20ms/audio. Quality equivalent for 10,20ms for mode=voip. PESQ was the tool that alerted me to something of interest, but I don't trust PESQ to almost any degree! It's good for hearing relative differences, of course, but not absolutes. Bitrate here was 28kbps, but I hear same thing at 32kbps. Please find attached a zip file with the audio files,...

...order to analyze audio streams for MOS scores and >> performance parameters? >> > > The MOS evaluation is subjective, not objective and actually involves > getting (many) real people to listen to the audio, not just buying a > product. Of course, there's tools like PESQ that attempt to guess MOS > scores, but it's really just a guess. You can find these kinds of > results for Speex on the comparison page: http://www.speex.org/comparison/ > While MOS is based on the subjective evaluation of a number of people, the final result can be said to be rea...

Hi Jim, First of all - thanks, turning the highpass filter off was what I needed, and the waveforms match now. But, when i did the PESQ tests again I found an interesting result : version 1.0.5 still got a slightly better average score, but the standard deviation on version 1.2 beta1 was much smaller. The cause for that is this - on some samples versions 1.0.5 and 1.2beta2 produced a single noticable 'click' during the spee...

Hi, I have been using speex version 1.0.5 on a text-to-speech program. Recently I upgraded to version 1.2beta1 and noticed that the waveform the I got after encoding and decoding on the new versions (beta1,beta2) is much more different than the original than on version 1.0.5. I also ran a PESQ comparison test on 700 voice samples and got better results in the older version (I used quality 9, and disabled perceptual enhancement). Do you know what can cause these changes? My application requires the waveform after decoding to be as similar in shape to the original, so if the difference is...

Hello, What is meant by crude delay in PESQ quality testing? And what is its tolerant limit for good quality. rgds, Sharan

Hello developers, I have a question about supported bitrates for SPEEX. Regardless of whether I specify a 10kbps or a 8kbps bitrate, the encoded .spx file is the same size and have the same PESQ value. This makes me wonder if SPEEX supports arbitrary bitrates, or only a certain set. A few more details about my configuration: I am using SPEEX encoder version 1.1.12 I am encoding a narrowband (8KHz) wav file The exact commands I issue are: speexenc --bitrate 8000 file.wav file8.spx speexe...

...----------------------- During the experiment the set of source speech samples goes throught simulation model which reproduces voice distortion during encoding and decoding processes (throught codec in fact). After that the source speech samples are compared with the degraded ones according to the PESQ algorithm as defined in P.862 ITU-T recommendation. The comparison is performed with ITU pesq utility. Source speech samples has the length about 8-15 seconds. The samples contain male and female voices, all sentence are pronounced in english. All speech samples are given from internet podcast int...

Hi, I am wondering if you may be able to help me. I have an application that has been developed by a third party and is being used in some field locations. My challenge is that I have no way of independently testing the product across the WAN at this point. All testing they have proposed required manual intervention and subjective analysis. I am not comfortable deploying the solution in this

...I think it's just the delay it found between the input and output. In any case, you shouldn't pay attention to it (unless you get a very large value, in which case it can mean a bug in how you generate the files). Jean-Marc Sharanu wrote: > Hello, > What is meant by crude delay in PESQ quality testing? > And what is its tolerant limit for good quality. > rgds, > Sharan > > >

...r preliminary experiments, we've got a value of Ie=0 for Speex at 24.6kbps, which is the same value for the G.711 (64kbps). All other codecs has generally Ie above 0, because of lossy compression. Thus, I'm amazed that Speex at 24.6kbps is giving us a very good value of Ie=0. Looking at the PESQ x bitrate graph presented at Speex home page (http://www.speex.org/comparison/), I saw that the last red cross point of Speex is very close to the pink square point of G.711, which corroborates to our findings. We've also used PESQ in our experiments, so I'm afraid that our results can be o...

Hi Opus list, Please forgive me if this has been asked before. I find that Opus encoder created in mode OPUS_APPLICATION_AUDIO (as opposed to _VOIP) is using a lot of bits to encode silent periods of speech. This is relevant to a voip application for which good quality music is desirable, and in which I add a minimal comfort noise (order of few bits loud, e.g. MLS signal of amplitude 1 or 2)

Benjamin, Thanks for the prompt response. Are there other recommended methods to verify encoder implementations? Regards, Chris From: benjamin.m.schwartz at gmail.com [mailto:benjamin.m.schwartz at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Benjamin Schwartz Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2013 1:53 PM To: Wang, Chris Cc: opus at xiph.org Subject: Re: [opus] Questions Regarding Opus Test Vectors On Sun, Nov 10,

...using speex version 1.0.5 on a text-to-speech program. > Recently > I upgraded to version 1.2beta1 > and noticed that the waveform the I got after encoding and decoding on the > new versions (beta1,beta2) is much > more different than the original than on version 1.0.5. I also ran a PESQ > comparison test on 700 voice samples > and got better results in the older version (I used quality 9, and > disabled perceptual enhancement). > Do you know what can cause these changes? > My application requires the waveform after decoding to be as similar in > shape to the ori...

...nd between the input and output. In > any case, you shouldn't pay attention to it (unless you get a very large > value, in which case it can mean a bug in how you generate the files). > > Jean-Marc > > Sharanu wrote: >> Hello, >> What is meant by crude delay in PESQ quality testing? >> And what is its tolerant limit for good quality. >> rgds, >> Sharan >> >> >> > >