similar to: AEC strange behaviour

hi, Paul Novodon Maybe the same question happened to me some yrs ago when I was testing a PBFDAF AEC filter. Could you provide me the recorded file to me to study? Including: the working two files ( far end signal and far end echo + near end signal) the not working two files ( far end signal and far end echo + near end signal) HyeeWang > ------------------------------ >

On 2010-03-16 06:35, Greger Burman wrote: > Ok. Thanks J-M for clearing that up. > What if you mix up the polarity on one speaker (180 degree phase > change), would that matter? Not at all. It's still all linear. You can even apply a different equalizer to each speaker and it'll still be linear. Jean-Marc > cheers > Greger > > 2010/3/15 Jean-Marc Valin

If more than one speaker receives the *same* signal, it doesn't matter the number of speakers. It only gets tricky when the speakers are playing slightly different signals (e.g. from a stereo song). Jean-Marc Quoting Greger Burman <greger at mobile-robotics.com>: > One thing I can think of is if you are using two or more speakers. If the > speakers are not at the exact same

Hello. I have the following situation. AEC is used in network chat software over DirectSound API. Echo and reference signals are almost aligned (delay is no more than 30ms). When echo is emulated in notebook (built-in speakers + mic) everything goes fine and echo is cancelled. But when configuration includes stand-alone speakers and mic no echo is removed. Audio is in 22050 hz at 16 bit

Hello, Hyee Wang. I'm currently working on project using AEC library. My colleague Paul Novodon already contacted you at http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/2009-November/007550.html but you didn't answered. I'm starting to investigate this problem in a couple of days, and I really want to hear from you if you faced the described problem earlier and know the solution.

On Mar 15, 2010, at 8:46 AM, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > If more than one speaker receives the *same* signal, it doesn't matter the > number of speakers. It only gets tricky when the speakers are playing slightly > different signals (e.g. from a stereo song). > Does "tricky" mean that the Speex AEC won't handle such situations well? Or just that you had to be

One thing I can think of is if you are using two or more speakers. If the speakers are not at the exact same distance from the mic, you will get more than one echo. AEC can not handle that. Try disconnecting all but one speaker and see if it makes any difference. cheers Greger 2010/3/15 Anton A. Shpakovsky <saa at tomsksoft.com> > Hello. > > I have the following situation. AEC

Ok. Thanks J-M for clearing that up. What if you mix up the polarity on one speaker (180 degree phase change), would that matter? cheers Greger 2010/3/15 Jean-Marc Valin <Jean-Marc.Valin at usherbrooke.ca> > If more than one speaker receives the *same* signal, it doesn't matter the > number of speakers. It only gets tricky when the speakers are playing > slightly >

On 2010-03-16 14:22, Josh Gargus wrote: >> If more than one speaker receives the *same* signal, it doesn't >> matter the number of speakers. It only gets tricky when the >> speakers are playing slightly different signals (e.g. from a stereo >> song). > > Does "tricky" mean that the Speex AEC won't handle such situations > well? Or just that you

This kind of behaviour is odd. One of the reason could be the fact that you're using a really long impulse response. Try syncing your signals and making the tail length more in the order of 100 ms to 300 ms. Jean-Marc Le dimanche 06 novembre 2005 ? 21:25 -0800, Jason Harper a ?crit : > Thanks for alerting me to the new changes. I just > tried the latest code from SVN, but

Are you sure you're not just inverting the two inputs? Jean-Marc On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 22:16 -0800, Jason Harper wrote: > I ran some further tests on mdf and here are the > results: > 1. reduced tail length to 100ms, aligned mic and > speaker signals to within 10ms - almost no echo > attenuation > 2. aligned mic and speaker signals to within 5 samples > - still almost

On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Jean-Marc Valin < jean-marc.valin at usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > OK, here's what happens. There is indeed a small difference between > beta3 and rc1, but the fundamental problem isn't there. I've attached > plots of the speaker signal (blue) alongside the mic signal (green). You > can see the delay is in the order of 1000 samples.

I've recently made changes to the AEC. Please try the code in SVN and see if it works better. Jean-Marc Le jeudi 03 novembre 2005 ? 22:36 -0800, Jason Harper a ?crit : > I've tried some further debugging to see what mdf is > actually doing. Instead of sending: > tmp_out = (float)ref[i] - st->y[i+st->frame_size] > to the output, I just sent >

OK, here's what happens. There is indeed a small difference between beta3 and rc1, but the fundamental problem isn't there. I've attached plots of the speaker signal (blue) alongside the mic signal (green). You can see the delay is in the order of 1000 samples. That's way too much to do anything useful because the tail doesn't even "see" the echo. You need to reduce

I'm pretty much sure of it. When I test inverting the inputs, my output is pretty much the same as my speaker signal. Whereas the way that I normally test the output is my mic signal with very little attenuation. If you are interested I can send my test files; they are about 94KB each. -Jason --- Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > Are you sure you're

I've tried some further debugging to see what mdf is actually doing. Instead of sending: tmp_out = (float)ref[i] - st->y[i+st->frame_size] to the output, I just sent st->y[i+st->frame_size] to see what was being subtracted from the microphone input. When I open this in Audacity, I see a very small signal at about -40dBm. The actual echo in my sample has a power closer to -20dBm.

You may have triggered an instability problem. Can you upload your files somewhere so I can have a look at them? Jean-Marc Andras Kadinger a ?crit : > Greetings everyone, > > I was about to compare AEC performance between 1.1.12 and 1.2beta1 when > I noticed something. > > If I configure (and compile) speex-1.1.12 with > > ./configure --enable-shared=no

When I ran test 4 as originally described there is substantial echo cancellation (but not as good as when the files are perfectly aligned). When I invert the inputs, there is no noticeable cancellation. I'm using testecho with the preprocess line commented out. Preprocess seems to work very well at cleaning up the residual echo when mdf does its job, so I'm just focusing on testing mdf.

Thanks for alerting me to the new changes. I just tried the latest code from SVN, but unfortunately I still have just about the same results. The estimated echo that gets subtracted from the actual echo is such a small signal that it doesn't really result in any noticeable echo attenuation. I currently have my filter size set to 2 seconds even though the echo in my microphone file is only

Greetings everyone, I was about to compare AEC performance between 1.1.12 and 1.2beta1 when I noticed something. If I configure (and compile) speex-1.1.12 with ./configure --enable-shared=no --enable-static=yes it compiles and works as expected: I can run a mic and speaker signal through testecho, it runs in a reasonable amount of time (about 23 secs for 3 minutes of audio) and I get back