Displaying 20 results from an estimated 4000 matches similar to: "Questions about the resampler"
2007 Dec 10
2
AEC gets worse as sample rate increases
Hi all,
I am attempting to test AEC behavior at various sample rates.
I ran a little experiment: I recorded a 10 seconds voice clip and the
resampled at 8000, 11025, 16000, 22050, 24000, 32000, 44100 and 48000.
I have a small applications that plays a wave file, records whatever
comes in from the microphone and applies the Speex AEC and
preprocessor on the input. It then saves the raw
2007 Nov 05
2
[patch] speex_preprocess_ctl
Did you check it against the trunk in SVN?
If it's not applied, and you can hook Jean-Marc up with an email
address like yours, I'm sure he will get right on it. :)
Tom
Mihai Balea <mihai@hates.ms> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Did anything happen to this patch?
> It seems to me that it fixes a valid issue, but I'm not an expert.
> Anyways, I didn't see
2007 Oct 25
1
Obtaining loudness information in 1.2beta2
What would be a good parameter to return that would better represent
the loudness of the signal?
As for the your other comments, I'll make the necessary changes and
resubmit.
Thanks,
Mihai
On Oct 25, 2007, at 7:45 PM, Jean-Marc Valin wrote:
> I'm in favor of the idea, but not of the current implementation. There
> are two problems:
> 1) The st->loudness parameter
2007 Oct 25
3
Obtaining loudness information in 1.2beta2
Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2411 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20071025/268c3593/smime.bin
2008 May 29
2
FFT Resampler
>> Yes, I plan to use it in a VoIP environment if I can get latency reduced to
>> an acceptable level :)
>> The latency depends directly on the overlap parameter, which also controls
>> the quality. Higher quality => higher latency. You could set the overlap to
>> 0, but that would give you some nasty artifacts.
>> You can also resample with smaller block
2010 Dec 06
2
Problems with Speex Resamplers
How much latency are we talking about? It seems that this issue cannot be
easily pinpointed, but if it turns out to be related to the Speex Resampler
let me know and I will put it on my task list.
- Sherief
-----Original Message-----
From: speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org [mailto:speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org] On
Behalf Of Colin Guthrie
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 9:47 AM
To: speex-dev at
2019 Nov 06
0
【SPEEX】 use speex resample make noise
Look, how about you start from the testresample.c file? Oh, and you seem
to be reading 320 samples at a time and processing 640, so that can't be
good (and even beyond that your code is wrong for other reasons).
Jean-Marc
On 11/6/19 1:56 AM, zhouyuchen at iauto.com wrote:
> Hello,
> I printed the log, in/out len is not truncated, which means that the
> input and output are not
2008 May 29
2
FFT Resampler
Ok. I did some quality tests.
First off; never do quality tests with ints. I had serious problems
interpreting my results until it dawned on me that the signal
differences were just 0 or 1. So, after a lot of scratching my head,
these are done comparing the result from the _float versions (which is
how both resamplers work internally anyway).
What I did was this:
Load speex_wb.wav as one
2010 Dec 06
2
Problems with Speex Resamplers
If you can produce a simple minimal repro that exhibits this issue on some
procedural signal (sine wave, etc) I'd love to look into it some more - I'm
maintaining a hardened version of the Speex Resampler and would be very
concerned if this bug made it into production.
- Sherief
-----Original Message-----
From: speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org [mailto:speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org] On
2008 Jan 15
2
Reverberation cancellation
Hi,
I'm trying to use Speex Echo Canceller for mobile device. The AEC works well
so far.
However, I want to know how to remove reverberation significantly. I noticed
it's not implemented yet in Speex AEC. Are you going to implement it in next
version? Could you provide some ideas how to handle reverberation on current
version?
Thanks in advance.
Sincerely,
Dennis
2010 Dec 03
2
Problems with Speex Resamplers
Colin,
If you're using stereo audio with the resampler, there is a bug that can
occur under certain situations (and maybe that's what's been happening
to you). Check out:
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/2009-August/007406.html
With that patch, I've used the resampler extensively in many situations
without any problems.
John Ridges
On 12/3/2010 1:00 PM,
2007 Oct 29
1
Obtaining loudness information in 1.2beta2
Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2411 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20071029/ada97768/smime.bin
2012 Sep 12
1
opus-tools resampler
Hi,
I've noticed that the opus-tools is using a really old version of Speex's resampler code - a version that I've seen fail in the wild first-hand under low resource circumstances. I've actually submitted patches for some issues in the Speex resampler a while ago (and IIRC they were accepted): http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/2009-November/007541.html ,
2008 Feb 14
2
Speex Resampler quality
Hi,
I just built a sample application with speex resampler in linux and I tried
to resample 8K sine wave tone mono to 48k using speex_resample_process_int.
I am using a tool called EAQUAL for audio quality. I find the quality of
Speex resampler to be decreasing when I increase the quality q of the
resampler init function. Can some one give me pointers regarding this?? As
per the API, if the
2008 Feb 18
2
Speex Resampler quality
Hi,
*"That's in general not very reliable. You can get PEAQ to say all sorts
of silly things."
Can you provide me links for any more effective tools other than PEAQ?
Which is more reliable for Speex resampler?
*
*"strongly suspect that it's just not compensating for the delay
introduced by the resampler. Because higher quality means higher delay,
you'd find that PEAQ
2008 May 29
2
FFT Resampler
Alexander Chemeris wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here are some questions from user point of view. :)
>
> On 5/29/08, Thorvald Natvig <thorvald at natvig.com> wrote:
>
>> I've done listening tests when converting wb_male.wav to 44.1, 48 and 8khz,
>> and there aren't any obvious artifacts. I also did a 16=>16 test, and the
>> results are delayed by 10ms
2008 May 28
2
FFT Resampler
Attached is a snapshot of work-in-progress of a FFT based resampler. At
the moment it works in floating point only, and only basic quality
inspection has been done.
Some benchmarks comparing the filter-based resampler at Q3 with the FFT
resampler with overlap = in_len / 2, using 20ms chunks of data. (-O3
-ffast-math, FFTW3, gcc 4.3.0 on x86_64)
16=>48: 59us vs 19us
16=>44.1: 204us vs
2008 Feb 05
1
Re: Problem with Blackfin assembly optimizations -- bug in fixed_bfin.h / resampler saturation???
Hi,
I just started to examine the DIV32_16 function (Blackfin ASM version), and wondered why the return value of the function inside 'fixed_bfin.h' is of type 'spx_word16_t', but the local variable 'res' which is returned by this function is of type 'spx_word32_t'. Is this a trick of optimization or a bug?
(Same question for PDIV32_16 and MAX16, too!)
best
2008 Feb 08
1
Re: Problem with Blackfin assembly optimizations -- bug in fixed_bfin.h / resampler saturation???
Hi,
I tried to figure out what the problem is -- but it seems to be totally different from what I expected.
My status at the moment is:
- computing results for "generic" and "Blackfin ASM" versions of the DIV32_16 function are the same, there is no "algorithmic bug"
- Instead, there seems some sort of memory corruption:
When I comment out the DIV32_16 function
2016 Feb 04
2
Resampler set_rate improvements
Hi Jean-Marc,
Thanks for taking a look.
I've added an example program in the patches that changes the rate
frequently. You can run test-resample2 >test.raw and open in audacity or so
to look at the spectrum etc. I've attached a before/after screenshot.
In theory, depending on the current phase and the rate changes that are
applied, the error can be audible as a pop when changing