similar to: Adding robustness to Speex on wireless networks.

I would like to know if my vision of things is correct about frame structure. -------------------------------------------------------- Frame header -------------------------------------------------------- Subframe1 header|Subframe1 content| -------------------------------------------------------- Subframe2 header|Subframe2 content| --------------------------------------------------------

In order to develop a Voip application, today i should make it robust to bit-errors over wireless networks. This is an actually lack of Speex, infact what i've understood is that if a packet arrives corrupted, i must pass NULL to the decoder in order to let it know. My target is to use UDP (with checksum field disabled) and exploit also corrupted packets giving them to the AMR codec. Otherwise

Ops i meant: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wideband bit|Mode ID|LSP|OL pitch|OL Exc gain| --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fine pitch1| --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pitch gain1| ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi folks, My wife and I are taking a long weekend to celibrate our anniversary. I won't be around again until Wednesday to answer email or do anything else on Vorbis. Yeah, I know, I usually answer my email once a month anyway (so likely no one would notice me being gone), but just so folks know if anything really juicy comes up :-) I'll be merging my latest branch with mainline

Hello, ????????at the beginning I want to underline that I've read SpeeX documentation and did some tests. I know that SpeeX was designed for networks in which packets arrive without errors, or don't arrive at all. SpeeX is very attractive if we consider low bit rates. I need to use SpeeX in very noisy environment, where speech quality doesn't matter, I'm interested in 2kb/s

During the interesting interview that binaryfreedom has made with Monty and Jack, Monty mentions cascading, a feature that will be added, quote: "Cascading is the ability to make multiple passes through the frequency spectrum, iteratively filling in more detail, like a progressive jpeg". What are the advantages of something like this - does this generally improves quality or is it used

Hello, Jean-Marc Valin schrieb: >>I am planning on creating a steganographic extension for speex/CELP. >>Since speex/CELP is lossy, there should be quite many bits that one >>can use for hiding data. > > Quite the opposite. Speex uses very few bits, so every bit you corrupt > is likely to be heard. You would need to use "fractions of bits" at a > time.

Rethinking to BER in UMTS, it seems acceptable to use speex on it do you agree? ----- Messaggio originale ----- Da: marzullo maio <marzullo63@yahoo.it> A: Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org Inviato: Sabato 5 maggio 2007, 23:06:40 Oggetto: Re: [Speex-dev] AMR vs Speex on wireless networks. NB for CSD/HSCSD and WB for UMTS/HSDPA. The UMTS/HSDPA

Dear Speex developers, I think I found a typo in libspeex/preprocess.c (that still in the SVN version too). Please correct me if I would be wrong. Patch is attached. (Yours :parenthetically &dezzy) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: noise_var.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 518 bytes Desc: not available Url :

Hi Jean-Marc, Hi Jim, I have also seen some problems with the 1.1.8 release on the C55x. So far I have boiled down the issues to the following: 1) We need our own "fixed_xx.h" header file. I don't know why, and haven't had time to investigate, but there is a definite improvement when I use the attached fixed_c55x.h file which has turned all the maths into inline functions.

Hello, I''ve install ror/mongrel etc, etc on a linux server (rhes). As i''m not root, all package startinf from ruby have been install into ~/gconf/usr ruby-1.8.6 and all of this gem package: -r-xr--r-- 1 dimnce dba 168448 Aug 9 14:53 rails-1.2.3.gem -r-xr--r-- 1 dimnce dba 84480 Aug 9 14:56 rake-0.7.3.gem -r-xr--r-- 1 dimnce dba 217088

Hi, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >> 1. What is the point in multiplying a codebook index with some number >> ant adding a loop variable to it as done in the exc unquant function. >> for (j=0;j<subvect_size;j++) >> exc[subvect_size*i+j]+=s*0.03125*shape_cb[ind[i]*subvect_size+j]; > > That's just how you represent a 2D array in C: the codebook has

Hi, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > Well, you could change the order in the encoder as long as you reverse > it in the decoder as well. Ok, I see that in the split_cb_shape_sign_unquant function, that each coefficient is tied to it's position in the nb_subvect exc coefficients. Honestly, I have problems understanding what exactly the codebook search works like. If you have the time to to

I upgraded my versions of llvm, clang and compiler-rt to the top-of-tree versions from last night (r180162, April 24). I recompiled debug versions of llvm, clang and my code. I then regenerated my test case and the results were the same - I can list lines of dwarf1.lsp in lldb but I can't set break-points or do anything else (what else should I be able to do?). The updated file that

One other thing that may or may not illuminate the situation. When I run under gdb (on OS X 10.8.3 this is an ancient version of gdb 6.3.5 - but it works with clang compiled C++ code) I get the following error when I try to list a line in dwarf1.lsp: Dwarf Error: Cannot handle DW_FORM_<unknown> in DWARF reader [in module /Users/meister/Development/cando/src/tests/core/dwarf1.bundle] (gdb)

Hello list I'm joining the effort to port speex to a fixed-point version, but as I'm a physicist used to deal only with floating point numbers (lots of them), I have no practice in working with fixed-point versions of such numbers. For instance, in the first source I'm trying to work with, nb_celp.c, it is hard to see that the following two lines of code yield the same

When i use VBR do i need to set VBR quality or speex quality? Is the speex quality referred to the overall quality and instead VBR quality only if i use VBR? Do these qualities override each other? Thanks. --------------------------------- L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

(Disclaimer: this is not an LPC vs. LSP question) After looking at the Vorbis code I was wondering why you were using LSP to quantize the spectral envelope instead of simply quantizing the cepstrum (DCT(log(envelope))) or modified cepstrum (DCT(envelope.^alpha)). To me it seems like when the information is already in the frequency domain, there's no need to go back to LPC. Also, I think a DCT

It seems to me that in this version of the function using float p=.7071067812f; float q=.7071067812f; will just leads after applying all the products and squaring to p and q having a common factor 0.5 which can be extracted from the formulaes. So I propose to replace: float p=.7071067812f; float q=.7071067812f; float w=vorbis_coslook(wdel*k); float *ftmp=lsp; int

Hi there, I would like to ask something about how to avoid a possible error message within a for loop. I am running a simulation and in some repetitions there may be an error that will cause a crash and stop the whole procedure, what I want is to simply move on to the next iteration automatically and discard the "bad" repetitions from my results. I used the "try" function to