similar to: Speech switching in speakerphone?

Hi Jean-Marc > Can you explain what you mean here by "speech switching" By speech switching I mean the adaption of "gain2" when near-end or far-end is talking. What is important is that the timing is good and that the gain is low/high while far/near-end is talking. By timing I mean that the "gain2" should remain low until all far-end talk is final and that the

>What happens if you make SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS_ACTIVE less >aggressive. Does it end up with too much echo or it just doesn't realise >that it's in double-talk conditions? My impression is that it does not make much difference on the timing to set this parameter less aggressive. Depending on the how loud the near end is talking it may detect double talk but most

Johan Nilsson a ?crit : >> There's also a parameter to control the maximum amount of >> suppression allowed: SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_NOISE_SUPPRESS : noise >> suppression SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS : echo suppression >> when there is no local talk >> SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS_ACTIVE: echo suppression in >> double-talk > > Yes, I am

Johan Nilsson a ?crit : > We are using Speex AEC and preprocessor to handle the acoustic echo. The > AEC typically contribute with ERLE of 15-20 dB which should be as > expected from the algorithm. Additionally we need about 30 dB echo > suppression which we hope to get from the preprocessor. So far it seems like you're doing things right. > However it has shown to be very

>> I think the residual echo estimation is fairly reliable but I do not know >> how to use this to improve Pframe and in that way solve our main problem >> with the gain during near end talk. > > How can you tell that the residual echo estimation is reliable? in any > case, I suspect that the whole Pframe idea might have to be revised > (i.e. computing it completely

> No, the 1.2beta1 preprocessor works rather well. I have a different opinion, but glad you like it anyway :-) > In fact, I very much welcomed the change that the preprocessor in > 1.2beta1 now starts out with the assumption of there being no speech, > and only activating and adapting AGC when where there is new activity > detected above that. As a result, with 1.2beta1, there is

As for me - speex_echo_cancellation is a better choise. Try using it in capture thread instead of those speex_echo_capture and speex_echo_playback functions. And please, describe your problem in details. Cause the fact that you "didn get echo cancellation" doesn't mean you are doing smth wrong. Regards, Anton A. Shpakovsky -----Original Message----- From: speex-dev-bounces at

Johan Nilsson a ?crit : >> What happens if you make SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_SUPPRESS_ACTIVE less >> aggressive. Does it end up with too much echo or it just doesn't realise >> that it's in double-talk conditions? > > My impression is that it does not make much difference on the timing to > set this parameter less aggressive. Depending on the how loud the

Hi! I am still trying to clean the voice after procesing it with speex echo cancellation filter. I get some artifacts, the echo is removed, but you can here some metallic voices in background. Jean, in your test client you are using UDP connection and SpeexJitter to make sure UDP packets are in order. What if I use TCP/IP, do I still have to use SpeexJitter when using speex_echo_cancel ?

Sorry, got the subject wrong in the last mail. My e-mail client is playing games with me...

Hi. After changing my code to construct a JitterBufferPacket and passing that to speex_jitter_put, my program works with the new jitter buffer using the wrapper functions (speex_jitter_* instead of the new jitter_buffer_*). However, a lot of warning: did you forget to call jitter_buffer_tick() by any chance? is displayed. Looking at speex_jitter_get, the logic seems to be as follows: if

Hi  I have a dataframe similar to: >Sample<-c(1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3) >Time<-c(1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) >Mass<-c(3,3.1,3.4,4,4.3,4.4,3,3.2,3.5) >mydata<-as.data.frame(cbind(Sample,Time,Mass))   Sample Time Mass 1      1    1  3.0 2      1    2  3.1 3      1    3  3.4 4      2    1  4.0 5      2    2  4.3 6      2    3  4.4 7      3    1  3.0 8      3    2  3.2 9      3    3

Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >> I've had a small case with noise suppression and AGC. I have a fairly >> noisy environment here, and with the default parameters, noise >> suppression works fairly well while I talk. However, when I shut up, AGC >> starts slowly increasing the gain until it has amplified whatever noise >> is left to levels about equal to having no

>> After changing my code to construct a JitterBufferPacket and passing that >> to speex_jitter_put, my program works with the new jitter buffer using the >> wrapper functions (speex_jitter_* instead of the new jitter_buffer_*). > > Oops, I forgot to make sure I keep the API stable for the old buffer. > Any thoughts on the change (revert or continue as is)? Well, I

Aymeric Moizard a ?crit : > > I'm working on the echo canceller with the SVN, with Windows Mobile 5 > PocketPC. > > Obviously, I can't make it run correctly. What happens/doesn't happen? > My question: If I use the SPEEX_PREPROCESS_SET_ECHO_STATE, I have > changes in the sound: noise seems to be removed. Noise should be removed even without

Hi, Tank you for your reply. I have tried the sample programs given the manual and done encoding and decoding a wave file. That is working fine. I have already read the manual and API reference. But this problem did not occured with the wave file encoding/decoding. While capturing the data from MIC and encoding/decoding is giving this problem. Thanks and Regards, Vijender Reddy, -----

Jean Marc, I have been fiddling around with preprocess to try to get it sounding less metallic/underwater- so based on some things said recently, I have been first fiddling with mean_post and mean_prior to try to get them to do change the update rate, so that update_noise gets called at the right times. Haven't made it too deep into the code, but I have a few questions in speex_preprocess:

Hi Jean-Marc, As I told you, bank is a reserved keyword in Analog Devices compiler for Blackfin architecture. So we need to change the variables named bank to something else. Here's a patch that changes bank to bnk in the 3 concerned files. (Hope the format is OK) About my previous problems with the Blackfin: -> strange block repetition that could be cancelled by the AEC I was busy

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| --------------------------------------------------------

What is the current status of the residual echo suppressor in the preprocessor? I ask this because I have occasional problems with the AEC, in which it fails to cancel echo. I think the problems have to do with samples being dropped by the audio IO system, which is effectively impossible to detect and counteract reliably. A colleague recommended using an echo suppression technique (which he