similar to: opus Digest, Vol 121, Issue 3

Hi, I've been using the command line opusenc/opusdec tools for a while now to encode/decode files. The next version of OS X changes a few things, so I was looking to recompile these tools using a version of the OS X SDK > 10.7 (needed for apple's "hardened runtime") but had no luck. How can I compile a static version of opus tools on OS X that doesn't depend on any other

Hi, Seems like it's not linking with libm. I suspect it has to do with linking statically with libopus.a (is that intended?). Maybe opus-tools relies on the fact that libopus is linked with libm and doesn't explicitly add it? Greg? Jean-Marc On 09/24/2013 06:09 AM, bat guano wrote: > Hi > I'm having a problem compiling opus-tools-0.1.7. > Version opus-tools-0.1.6 seems to

Hi I'm having a problem compiling opus-tools-0.1.7. Version opus-tools-0.1.6 seems to compile OK. I've tried with opus-1.0.3 and opus-1.1-beta. The errors are like this:- "undefined reference to `sqrtf'" etc. This OS is Peppermint Three, similar to Ubuntu 12.04. It uses:- gcc --version gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5) 4.6.3 Google says it's maybe something to do

Hi, Dear alls I had encounted a problem in using opus-tool-0.2-opus-1.3(download from www.opus-codec.org, Win64 binaries: opus-tools-0.2-win64.zip). First, I use opusenc to generate a opus file which input is a 9-channels wav file. The opusenc can work. Then, I use opusdec to transform the generated opus file to wav file, but opusdec can't work. I received the error message: failed to open

Hi, I have found differences in quality between opus_demo and opusenc/opusdec. I used for both applications the same raw pcm file,16 bit,48khz,litle endian. i use libopus 1.1-beta and opus-tools-0.1.7. The command for opus_demo is: opus_demo audio 48000 1 64000 -cvbr -framesize 10 in.pcm out.pcm For opusenc/dec: opusenc --raw --raw-chan 1 bitrate 64 -cvbr --framesize 10 in.pcm in.opus

Hi, I am interested in this part of the answer: "Make sure both are also linked to the same libopus (opusenc could be using the system libopus 1.0.x while opus_demo is from git)" I dowloaded a tarball distrib of libopus (1.1-beta),build and installed it,and afterwards did the same with opus-tools (0.1.7),using the former installed libopus library (also using libogg 1.3.1). When I execute

Hey Kevin! Once you start dropping under (I think) 32kbps, the codec naturally starts losing stereo separation for the benefit of quality. If you really want perfect stereo at 16kbps CBR (this is horrifically low in my opinion) you might be better off splitting the audio and encoding each part at 8kbps CBR. Or, there may be a magic "enforce 100% stereo" one could pass? (doesn't look

Hello, I've been using Opus on an STM32 M4 platform for speech coding in mono mode. I thought I'd try stereo for grins to see if I can handle the CPU load, and I'm getting a return code of -1 from opus_decode_float (using CBR and 40ms frames). I decided to try the opusenc and opusdec tools to just see how the command line apps would behave. I am getting decoded audio, but I am

This is the config line used:- PKG_CONFIG_PATH=3D"$HOME/builds/lib/pkgconfig" LDFLAGS=3D"-L$HOME/builds/li= b" CFLAGS=3D"-I$HOME/builds/include" ./configure --prefix=3D$HOME/builds --= host=3Di686-w64-mingw32 --disable-stack-protector @xubuntu:~/builds/bin$ wine ./opusenc -V opusenc opus-tools 0.1.5 (using libopus 1.0.1) Copyright (C) 2008-2012 Xiph.Org Foundation

I suspect the main difference is due to time alignment of the samples and the exact trimming at the beginning and at the end of the encoded files. I also note that there's a missing "--" in front of "bitrate" and only one "-" instead of two for cvbr in your opusenc command line. Make sure both are also linked to the same libopus (opusenc could be using the system

Hello, I understand it would be better to post several messages with separate topics but I hope I don't cause too much mess if I put it all in a single message this time. To be clear, recently I've been testing Opus Tools under Windows and these are my questions/observations. ????#1. To test encoding at low bitrates, I encoded a sine sweep at 12 kbps with Opusenc and then decoded

On Aug 07 08:30:31, hans at stare.cz wrote: > On Aug 07 00:41:52, petrparizek2000 at yahoo.com wrote: > > ????#1. To test encoding at low bitrates, I encoded a sine sweep at 12 kbps > > with Opusenc and then decoded the resulting file with Opusdec. > 1) Opusenc --bitrate 12 --downmix-mono Sweep50.wav Sweep50.opus Why are you using a stereo file containing the same sweep in both

> To be clear: did you mean the opus output of opusenc > or the wav output of opusdec? I meant during the decoding. There's one significant difference between how Opusdec deals with resampling and how, let's say, MP3 decoders usually deal with resampling. If I make an MP3 at a very low bitrate and if the encoder decides (because it's too low) to internally resample my audio

Hi I am an Audacity (http://audacity.sourceforge.net/) developer and I'd like to see Audacity reading and writing Opus files as easily as it does others. What would you recommend as a way forward for this? I am thinking that (Win) we should ship opusenc.exe and opusdec.exe and send command line stuff to them; that way we wouldn't need to dip into your code and as you update we would

opusdec -V opusdec opus-tools f2a2e88 (using libopus unknown) I've got an opus file encoded from a .wav off a cd, 44100Hz: opusinfo 2-24-Overture_in_C_\(In_Memoriam\).opus Processing file "2-24-Overture_in_C_(In_Memoriam).opus"... New logical stream (#1, serial: 38134f1f): type opus Encoded with libopus unknown User comments section follows... ENCODER=opusenc from opus-tools

On Aug 07 22:04:21, petrparizek2000 at yahoo.com wrote: > > The encoded opus file is 48kHz, > > so how would the output wav be resampled from 16kHz? To be clear: did you mean the opus output of opusenc or the wav output of opusdec? > > What are those "clear signs" exactly? > > The things that I can hear while listening at 1/2 or even 1/4 of the > original

Dear authors of Opus, currently, the manpages that come with opus-tools are written in the traditional man(7) markup language. I am proposing to rewrite them into the semantic markup of the mdoc(7) language. I am willing to do the work. Both the man(7) and mdoc(7) languages have been around for decades, and are supported by the prevalent formatters: groff(1) on most Linuxes and mandoc(1) on the

Hi, I noticed that in some scenarios, Opus 1.2.1 produces better quality than 1.3.1 does. In the use case here, I'm enabling FEC and "transcode" signals from telephony networks (PCMU, 8kHz sampling) to VoIP (48kHz here). In this case, Opus always produced some leakage/ringing above 4kHz but for 1.3.1, these artifacts became worse. The small script below can be used to demonstrate

Hi, I noticed that in some scenarios, Opus 1.2.1 produces better quality than 1.3.1 does. In the use case here, I'm enabling FEC and "transcode" signals from telephony networks (PCMU, 8kHz sampling) to VoIP (48kHz here). In this case, Opus always produced some leakage/ringing above 4kHz but for 1.3.1, these artifacts became worse. The small script below can be used to demonstrate

Hi Some Linux programs are 'static'. For example, these FFmpegs here ---> http://ffmpeg.gusari.org/static/ If we compile with Linux opusdec & opusenc & opusinfo & opusrtp using only static libraries libogg.a & libflac.a & libopus.a Are the four opus-tools programs then genuinely 'static', so that they will work on *any* Linux OS? $ ./opusenc -V opusenc