similar to: Fixed-point in CVS

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

> Yes, i have been using speex in my VoIP gateway product. There are > hundreds of threads that simultaneously call various speex APIs and > execute without any problem. But ofcourse, I use a speex encoder/decoder > vars on per stream basis. Its been tested successfully on Linux/Win2k. Actually, I just realized I fixed a potential minor thread problem recently. It's in 1.1.1

I was also wondering if there is a standard set of input sequences people are using to test Speex. I haven't stumbled upon it/them yet. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-speex-dev@xiph.org [mailto:owner-speex-dev@xiph.org]On > Behalf Of Jean-Marc Valin > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 7:24 PM > To: speex > Subject: Re: [speex-dev] Quality > > > > I

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

Hi, I uploaded a pre-release of beta3 for which I'd like to get feedback. There are some new features like a new "ultra-wideband" mode for 32 kHz operation (up to 48 kHz) and a (intensity) stereo mode. You can get the source at: http://www.speex.org/download/Speex-1.0beta3cvs.tar.gz So please test that code and report any bug or inconsistency you may find. Jean-Marc --

Hi, Now that Speex is getting pretty stable, I have decided to make a fixed-point/integer port the #1 priority. At this point, I'm looking for help from people with prior fixed-point experience and/or a good signal processing background. Anyone would like to volunteer? I have already started the port by converting to int some of the most used functions. While this should only have a small

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

> 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

Maybe this is plain stupid or off topic. Could an atleast working fixed-point implementation of Speex be made by using a C++ "faked float" class with overloaded operators? Don't know if this is a common way to solve stuff like this, but my guess is that it would work. //Best Regards, Jonas Tärnström. <p>> > So just how much work are we talking about, here, to convert

> > OK, so here's a first start. I've translated to intrinsics the asm I > > sent 1-2 days ago. The result is about 5% slower than the pure asm > > approach, so it's not too bad (SSE asm is 2x faster than x87). Note that > > unlike the previous version which had a kludge to work with order 8 > > (required for wideband), this version only works with order

Jean-Marc, Are you sure that you don't need to add just -msse to enable the intrinsics rather than a full fledged -march=pentium3? I did some playing around and I can get intrinsics code to compile with -march=i686 -msse on linux with that. Check out:

Le jeu 15/01/2004 à 15:30, Daniel Vogel a écrit : > Unrelated, but please use SSE/MMX/... intrinsics on Windows instead of using > inline assembly so you also get the speed benefit on Win64. OK, so here's a first start. I've translated to intrinsics the asm I sent 1-2 days ago. The result is about 5% slower than the pure asm approach, so it's not too bad (SSE asm is 2x faster

> 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,

Jean-Marc, Good catch on the debug mode. After compiling the same code in release mode it does appear to be using all the registers correctly. Give us a few days to integrate our run-time flags into 1.1.4 and I will let you know how are testing turns out. Aron Rosenberg SightSpeed At 08:54 PM 1/21/2004, you wrote: > > 1. Compile Error with regular mode (FIXED_POINT undefined)

Hi, Speex is getting close to beta4, which I'd like to be feature-complete (or as close as possible). That's why I'd like to ask if anyone here has needs for a feature that hasn't been implemented yet. If so, please let me know. For those interested, here's what's going to be in beta4. First, the VBR code has been greatly improved and now works good with wideband too.

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

It seems to work ok with the same audible quality as a standard sampling rate. Is there any way to test this? Will superimposing an inverse wave over the origional produce a meaningfull result? Thanks for your time, Ryan de Leeuw <p><p>>Sorry for the delay. I've been doing a couple tests >and what I'd suggest >is encoding using the narrowband (8 kHz normally)

> What is the maximum frame-length that libspeex will produce for narrow, > wide and ultrawide encoding? In normal operation (no in-band side information, like requests, ack, stereo, ...), the max size for a frame is 62 bytes in narrowband, 106 bytes for wideband and 110 bytes for ultra-wideband. Jean-Marc -- Jean-Marc Valin, M.Sc.A. LABORIUS (http://www.gel.usherb.ca/laborius)

Le dim 31/08/2003 à 20:12, Daniel Vogel a écrit : > > This works really well for white noise reduction. However > > what I've noticed was the amplitudes of normal speech samples > > also get reduced. > > Noticed this as well recently. This is probably due to the AGC (Adaptive Gain Control) that's integrated with the denoiser. I'll try adding an option to

Le lun 10/11/2003 à 11:19, Massimo a écrit : > On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 21:00, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > On recent x86 processors, floating point is faster than fixed-point. > > Jean-Marc > > This left me something shocked. Please, can you tell me what kind of > processors are showing this behaviour? Are you referring to speex > codec