similar to: speex and commercial use

Hello! The question is: "Does Speex support multiple channels?" Speex is reported to encode only mono and stereo signals. But I found 'nb_channel' defined in <speex_header.h> among the Public Attributes. Does this mean that it is also possible to store more than two channels in one single speex-file? Maybe it will be possible in the next future...? TIA -- Mch --- >8

> Is it a problem if all the files are compiled with -march=pentium3 > ? The patch that we sent in already detects in the configure.in script > which system you are on and sets a define correctly, i.e. _USE_SSE. Well, if what you want is auto-detection, turning on -march=pentium3 means that the code will crash on anything lower than a pentium3. Not really useful. Of course,

Hi, I am working with libspeex api. I would like compare the size of speex file encoded with libspeex and the size of speex file encoded with speexenc. For example, I encode with speexenc (narrowband, quality 1) a wav file of 1.43 MB (17 seconds) output a spx file weight 21KB, for other hand I encode with libspeex the same wav file with same characteristics in arm processor, pocket pc and the

Hi, just to let you know that unstable version 1.1.1 is out. It includes the latest fixed-point changes which can be enabled with --enable-fixed-point (as configure option) or -DENABLE_FIXED_POINT (for win32). The port is not complete, but most of the floating-point operations have been converted. Please give it a try and report any difference with previous versions (both for float and

Hi: I am new to speex and I am evaluating the possibility of using Speex for web conferencing (pretty big scale). It looks very promising. I have some questions, maybe very naive, but please help me: <p> 1) Is there any sample implementation using Speex in web conerencing in voice? To be more specific, in Windows platforms? (ActiveX? Java applet implementation?)

This portion of the RFC is gramatically incorrect and confusing: The RTP payload MUST be padded to provide an integer number of octets as the payload length. These padding bits MUST be all zero. This padding is only required for the last frame in the packet, and only to ensure the packet contents ends on an octet boundary. <p> -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>

> > >> You might like to write a JNI Wrapper. > > > That's what I'm doing now to get things rolling but I > was talking about a pure java solution. So is there any such > project underway? I wrote a JNI wrapper for speex a few months ago, it's not finished but it does work and i don't think it would need much work to be update it to speex 1.0 and

Hello, I'm new in using speex and programming with it. So, please help me to be more clear about it. I'm trying to write a voice decoder and encoder program using libspeex and using its variable bit-rates feature. At the encoder section I set the bit-rate of the output stream by setting "SPEEX_SET_ABR" option using this command:

Hmm, what these instructions do? (I know nothing about ARMs; I have some knowlege about x86 assemblers and programming). Cant we use pure standard C++ or Java? Does Speex work with fixedpoint math? (As far as I know Java on 6600 has no builtin floatingpoint, there is emulation class somewhere on the net, but it is probably painfully slow.) I do not know if this processor has builtin

> Am I right with the assumption, that currently you have to enable > processor specific optimizations with compile/configure options? > > How difficult would it be to add support for runtime CPU detection? > Is this a feature you might consider adding? Pretty complicated because of some annoying decisions taken by the gcc team. The problem is that gcc won't let you use

Hi, I just did some experiments and it seems like the high system CPU time is not due to one specific part of the code, but rather to the extreme inefficiency of float emulation under Linux. I was expecting float emulation to run something like 30 times slower than integer, but it looks like its more like 3000 times slower. This means that all of the float operations must be removed for the code

Le dim 09/11/2003 à 14:33, Steve Kann a écrit : > Just out of curiosity, has anyone profiled the difference between the > floating point and fixed point implementations on processors with > decent floating point support? (i.e. x86, PPC). On recent x86 processors, floating point is faster than fixed-point. Jean-Marc -- Jean-Marc Valin, M.Sc.A., ing. jr. LABORIUS

> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:22:53 -0500 > From: Jean-Marc Valin <Jean-Marc.Valin@USherbrooke.ca> > > I think I see what you mean, though I haven't been able to listen to > your wma file (not everyone has a wma decoder). The problem probably > only lies in the VBR tuning for wideband which hasn't received much work > yet. One way to check that is to encode in

Hi everyone, I've just released version 1.1.4. This includes some code cleanup and improvements to the fixed-point port and SSE optimizations. All the SSE code has been converted to intrinsics and some new functions have been implemented with SSE. Overall, the speed has been increased by up to ~30% with SSE. Jean-Marc -- Jean-Marc Valin, M.Sc.A., ing. jr. LABORIUS

Hi all, <p>im new on the list and want to introduce my self. Im a software developer working on engine control software for a german car manufacturer. I want to use speex for a privat videoconferencing project and faces some problems with it. First of all the projects in Visual-C++ doesn't work. I don't mean the path an dependecy problems. That is easy. But there are some errors.

Thanks very much. You mean both encode and decode simulateusly (duplex)? Could you test the Java version (jspeex) on that iPaq too? (I do not have anything other than very fast PC, so I cant do this...) And, in phone, the mic can record not only the users speech but also voice from the other side (from speaker)... Does this make compression harder or the result worse? How can this impact

Is Speex internally thread safe? <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'speex-dev-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.

Le mar 18/11/2003 à 17:39, Allen Drennan a écrit : > Speaking of video conferencing in conjunction with Speex, we are > currently beta testing a solution we developed that offers multi-point, > multi-party video and audio using the Speex engine for voice. > > http://www.wiredred.com/downloads/ecsetup.exe > > The fair and good audio settings are Speex narrowband, high quality

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:

Casting a pointer to an int is a bad idea on 64-bit platforms. --- libspeex/stack_alloc.h.orig Wed Jun 11 17:10:53 2003 +++ libspeex/stack_alloc.h Wed Jun 11 17:11:12 2003 @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ #else /*Aligns the stack to a 'size' boundary */ -#define ALIGN(stack, size) ((stack) += ((size) - (int)(stack)) & ((size) - 1)) +#define ALIGN(stack, size) ((stack) += ((size) - (long)(stack))