search for: senscom

Thanks for the response, Jim, you told me most of what I needed to know. > For very tight bandwidth applications speex is probably better, > if you have the cpu. Well, heh, I'm not sure if an ARM running at ~200mHz - with a fair amount of other stuff to do at the same time - really qualifies as "enough CPU." Is there sort of a rule of thumb for how much gumption a chip

...use, and although we've got budget for mulffing every sound card we developers use, most likely the company won't pay for a foil per licensed customer. So I still have to make our denoising work in this field scenario. -----Original Message----- From: John Haugeland [mailto:JohnH@senscom.com] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 10:43 AM To: 'speex-dev@xiph.org' Subject: RE: [speex-dev] speex_denoise on non-microphone noise (static ?) Take what I say with a grain of salt: I'm an amateur and haven't actually touched Speex in any way, yet. I'm just sort of pas...

...use, and although we've got budget for mulffing every sound card we developers use, most likely the company won't pay for a foil per licensed customer. So I still have to make our denoising work in this field scenario. -----Original Message----- From: John Haugeland [mailto:JohnH@senscom.com] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 10:43 AM To: 'speex-dev@xiph.org' Subject: RE: [speex-dev] speex_denoise on non-microphone noise (static ?) Take what I say with a grain of salt: I'm an amateur and haven't actually touched Speex in any way, yet. I'm just sort of pas...

I'm being PHBed into a VOIP project, and Speex sprang to mind. Bandwidth is going to be a fairly serious issue for us. With regards to a Speex enc/decoder, I was wondering: Rick Kane and David Siebert have already asked about this, but seem to have gotten very different responses - the former a call to arms, and the latter a "well, if you do it, it'll get done." What's the

> but it isn't going to be quite so low-bitrate when you > have IP (or some other) packets encapsulating it. Most packet systems, such as PPP and SLIP, want at least 9600 baud to play ball. Traditionally, low bandwidth systems like those are just open streams. The protocols built on top of those - old stalwarts like YModem/G, Kermit, and so forth - do admittedly generally chunk

> It might even work > on the arm940 (12MHz); if so that chip should be enough for an IP > phone with 711/rgl/ilbc/gsm/speex support. I would love to see a > 802.11 phone like that, complete with a tiny price. :) That's interesting. Mostly because I'm a hobbyist Gameboy programmer, and the AGB is an Arm7TDMI/16.78mHz. How big are speex "chunks?" Are we talking

Take what I say with a grain of salt: I'm an amateur and haven't actually touched Speex in any way, yet. I'm just sort of passing on personal belief from personal experience. Also, check and make sure that the microphone line is insulated. There are a number of problems with sound cards picking up interference from the host machine. The wires that run between ICs on a card

Not that I'm going to be doing this, but just out of curiosity, how well would speex perform for singing? I don't know if speex is specialized to the human voice, or the normal low-stress human voice. Does speex' performance change when dealing with shouting, etc? Have you ever tried jazz scat, or anything like that, cat? Just wondering. --- >8 ---- List archives:

>> Once converted to fixed I'm sure speex will be fine on strong arm >> and intel's newer stuff based on that (pxa?). So just how much work are we talking about, here, to convert to fixed-point? Seems like with some clever type substitution and a few inlines here and there it might maybe not be so horrible? But, then, I haven't looked inside of Speex yet, and don't